On 6/4/11 10:47 AM, Sven Schnelle wrote:
motherboards can use this hook to get notified if someone writes to the APM_CNT port (0xb2). If the hook returns 1, the chipset specific hook is also skipped.
Signed-off-by: Sven Schnellesvens@stackframe.org
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org
src/include/cpu/x86/smm.h | 2 +- src/southbridge/intel/i82801gx/smihandler.c | 3 +++ 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/include/cpu/x86/smm.h b/src/include/cpu/x86/smm.h index ad0984e..559b1b7 100644 --- a/src/include/cpu/x86/smm.h +++ b/src/include/cpu/x86/smm.h @@ -263,4 +263,4 @@ void __attribute__((weak)) northbridge_smi_handler(unsigned int node, smm_state_ void __attribute__((weak)) southbridge_smi_handler(unsigned int node, smm_state_save_area_t *state_save);
void __attribute__((weak)) mainboard_smi_gpi(u16 gpi_sts);
+int __attribute__((weak)) mainboard_apm_cnt(u8 data); diff --git a/src/southbridge/intel/i82801gx/smihandler.c b/src/southbridge/intel/i82801gx/smihandler.c index aefa283..bccf6d5 100644 --- a/src/southbridge/intel/i82801gx/smihandler.c +++ b/src/southbridge/intel/i82801gx/smihandler.c @@ -362,6 +362,9 @@ static void southbridge_smi_apmc(unsigned int node, smm_state_save_area_t *state /* Emulate B2 register as the FADT / Linux expects it */
reg8 = inb(APM_CNT);
- if (mainboard_apm_cnt&& mainboard_apm_cnt(reg8))
return;
Is it on purpose that the mainboard_apm_cnt function can prevent the generic 82801gx code (including the not implemented C state coordination) from running?
- switch (reg8) { case CST_CONTROL: /* Calling this function seems to cause