linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI / idle: Move idle_boot

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]

Message-ID: <52DD2DE9.9060202@linaro.org>
Date:	Mon, 20 Jan 2014 22:08:41 +0800
From:	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
CC:	Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>,
	"patches@...aro.org" <patches@...aro.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI / idle: Move idle_boot_override out of the arch
 directory

On 2014年01月18日 21:47, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, January 18, 2014 11:52:18 AM Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> On 2014-1-18 11:45, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>> On 2014-1-17 20:06, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>>> On 17/01/14 02:03, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>>> Move idle_boot_override out of the arch directory to be a single enum
>>>>> including both platforms values, this will make it rather easier to
>>>>> avoid ifdefs around which definitions are for which processor in
>>>>> generally used ACPI code.
>>>>>
>>>>> IDLE_FORCE_MWAIT for IA64 is not used anywhere, so romove it.
>>>>>
>>>>> No functional change in this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggested-by: Alan <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
>>>>> ---
>> [...]
>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpu.h b/include/linux/cpu.h
>>>>> index 03e235ad..e324561 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/linux/cpu.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/cpu.h
>>>>> @@ -220,6 +220,14 @@ void cpu_idle(void);
>>>>>   
>>>>>   void cpu_idle_poll_ctrl(bool enable);
>>>>>   
>>>>> +enum idle_boot_override {
>>>>> +	IDLE_NO_OVERRIDE = 0,
>>>>> +	IDLE_HALT,
>>>>> +	IDLE_NOMWAIT,
>>>>> +	IDLE_POLL,
>>>>> +	IDLE_POWERSAVE_OFF
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>> I do understand the idea behind this change, but IMO HALT and MWAIT are x86
>>>> specific and may not make sense for other architectures.
>>> yes, this is the strange part, the value is arch-dependent.
>>>
>>>> It will also require every architecture using ACPI to export
>>>> boot_option_idle_override which may not be really required.
>>> so, how about forget this patch and move boot_option_idle_override
>>> related code into arch directory such as arch/x86/acpi/boot.c for
>>> x86?
>> The general idea is that we can move all the arch-dependent codes
>> in ACPI driver to arch directory, then make codes in drivers/acpi/
>> arch independent.
> Well, MWAIT is arch-dependent, so I'm not sure how IDLE_NOMWAIT fits into
> include/linux/cpu.h?

So you will not happy with this patch and should find another solution?

Thanks
Hanjun
--
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/