linux-kernel - Re: [RFC part1 PATCH 3/7] ACPI / processor_core: Rework _PDC related stuff to make it more arch-independent

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 3 Dec 2013 17:02:23 +0000
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To:	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>, patches@...aro.org,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC part1 PATCH 3/7] ACPI / processor_core: Rework _PDC
 related stuff to make it more arch-independent

On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:51:40PM +0000, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> On Wed,  4 Dec 2013 00:36:47 +0800
> Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > _PDC related stuff in processor_core.c is little bit X86/IA64 dependent,
> > rework the code to make it more arch-independent.
> > 
> > The return value of acpi_processor_eval_pdc() should be 'acpi_status' but
> > defined as 'int', fix it too.
> 
> Why not just define boot_options_idle_override as well. Then you can
> leave the code unchanged. Also more importantly you can have override
> values for ARM when it turns out you need those too and the logic will be
> the same for both processor families

The arguments to _PDC are architecture specific, so there do need to be 
code changes here.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/