[PATCH] acpi: method: _PSS power dissipation levels can be equal to previous level

[Alex Hung]

On 08/01/2012 04:21 PM, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king at canonical.com>
>
> With newer CPUs we are seeing _PSS power dissipation levels that are equal
> to the previous level and this is not necessarily an error in the _PSS data.
> For example:
>
> P-State 0: CPU 2501 Mhz, 35000 mW, latency 10 us, bus master latency 10 us.
> P-State 1: CPU 2500 Mhz, 35000 mW, latency 10 us, bus master latency 10 us.
> P-State 2: CPU 2400 Mhz, 33218 mW, latency 10 us, bus master latency 10 us.
> P-State 3: CPU 2300 Mhz, 31470 mW, latency 10 us, bus master latency 10 us.
>
> This patch only flags up an error of the level is greater than the previous
> level rather than greater or equal.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king at canonical.com>
> ---
>   src/acpi/method/method.c |    2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/acpi/method/method.c b/src/acpi/method/method.c
> index 032f42e..9e81f07 100644
> --- a/src/acpi/method/method.c
> +++ b/src/acpi/method/method.c
> @@ -2003,7 +2003,7 @@ static void method_test_PSS_return(fwts_framework *fw, char *name, ACPI_BUFFER *
>
>   		/* Sanity check descending power dissipation levels */
>   		if ((i > 0) && (prev_power != 0) &&
> -		    (pstate->Package.Elements[1].Integer.Value >= prev_power)) {
> +		    (pstate->Package.Elements[1].Integer.Value > prev_power)) {
>   			fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_MEDIUM, "Method_PSSSubPackagePowerNotDecending",
>   				"_PSS P-State sub-package %d has a larger power dissipation "
>   				"setting than the previous sub-package.", i);
>

8.4.4.2 in ACPI: The list is sorted in descending order by typical power 
dissipation. It does not stop two states being equal.

Acked-by: Alex Hung <alex.hung at canonical.com>