[src/trunk]: src/sys/dev/acpi Remove the (debug) check that evaluated whether...

[jruoho <jruoho%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

details:   https://anonhg.NetBSD.org/src/rev/ecdc125ea6a5
branches:  trunk
changeset: 762247:ecdc125ea6a5
user:      jruoho <jruoho%NetBSD.org@localhost>
date:      Fri Feb 18 07:00:05 2011 +0000

description:
Remove the (debug) check that evaluated whether the first T-state (i.e. the
100 % duty cycle) had control value of zero, as in the IA32 clock modulation
MSR. As the access may be based on I/O, it is unclear if a strict validation
like this was correct. Should fix the problem reported by Hisashi T Fujinaka
on current users.

diffstat:

 sys/dev/acpi/acpi_cpu_tstate.c |  13 ++-----------
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diffs (34 lines):

diff -r c992fec23932 -r ecdc125ea6a5 sys/dev/acpi/acpi_cpu_tstate.c
--- a/sys/dev/acpi/acpi_cpu_tstate.c    Fri Feb 18 02:52:42 2011 +0000
+++ b/sys/dev/acpi/acpi_cpu_tstate.c    Fri Feb 18 07:00:05 2011 +0000
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-/* $NetBSD: acpi_cpu_tstate.c,v 1.19 2011/01/30 08:55:52 jruoho Exp $ */
+/* $NetBSD: acpi_cpu_tstate.c,v 1.20 2011/02/18 07:00:05 jruoho Exp $ */
 
 /*-
  * Copyright (c) 2010 Jukka Ruohonen <jruohonen%iki.fi@localhost>
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
  * SUCH DAMAGE.
  */
 #include <sys/cdefs.h>
-__KERNEL_RCSID(0, "$NetBSD: acpi_cpu_tstate.c,v 1.19 2011/01/30 08:55:52 jruoho Exp $");
+__KERNEL_RCSID(0, "$NetBSD: acpi_cpu_tstate.c,v 1.20 2011/02/18 07:00:05 jruoho Exp $");
 
 #include <sys/param.h>
 #include <sys/evcnt.h>
@@ -355,15 +355,6 @@
                goto out;
        }
 
-       /*
-        * The first entry with 100 % duty cycle
-        * should have zero in the control field.
-        */
-       if (sc->sc_tstate[0].ts_control != 0) {
-               rv = AE_AML_BAD_RESOURCE_VALUE;
-               goto out;
-       }
-
 out:
        if (buf.Pointer != NULL)
                ACPI_FREE(buf.Pointer);