[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54D2A139.5030602@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 15:46:17 -0700
From: Al Stone <ahs3@...hat.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, al.stone@...aro.org
CC: fenghua.yu@...el.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org,
catalin.marinas@....com, patches@...aro.org, will.deacon@....com,
robert.moore@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
devel@...ica.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
lenb@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI: add arch-specific compilation for _OSI and
the blacklist
On 02/04/2015 07:03 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 03:00:15 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 03, 2015 05:21:42 PM al.stone@...aro.org wrote:
>>> From: Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>
>>>
>>> Now that all of the _OSI functionality has been separated out, we can
>>> provide arch-specific functionality for it. This also allows us to do
>>> the same for the acpi_blacklisted() function.
>>>
>>> Whether arch-specific functions are used or not now depends on the config
>>> options CONFIG_ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI and CONFIG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_BLACKLIST.
>>> By default, both are set false which causes the x86/ia64 versions to be
>>> used, just as is done today. Setting one or both of these options true
>>> will cause architecture-specific implementations to be built instead; this
>>> patch also provides arm64 implementations.
>>>
>>> For x86/ia64, there is no functional change.
>>>
>>> For arm64, any use of _OSI will issue a warning that it is deprecated.
>>> All use of _OSI will return false -- i.e., it will return no useful
>>> information to any firmware using it. The ability to temporarily turn
>>> on _OSI, or turn off _OSI, or affect it in other ways from the command
>>> line is no longer available for arm64, either. The blacklist for ACPI
>>> on arm64 is empty. This will, of course, require ACPI to be enabled
>>> for arm64.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/Makefile | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist.c | 5 +++++
>>> drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 5 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> index 3e3bd35..4190940 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> @@ -369,6 +369,28 @@ config ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY
>>>
>>> If you are unsure what to do, do not enable this option.
>>>
>>> +config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>>
>> I woulnd't make this and the other one user-selectable. Let architectures
>> select them from their top-level Kconfig files.
>>
>> That's what we do with the other CONFIG_ARCH_ things.
>>
>> So in the architecture-specific Kconfig you'll have
>>
>> config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>> def_bool n
>> depends on ACPI
>>
>> Moreover, I'd call that ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI.
>
> Or even better, you can define them here (drivers/acpi/Kconfig/) as
>
> config ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI
> def_bool n
>
> and then do
>
> select ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI if ACPI
>
> as you did in [4/5].
>
>
Ah, indeed I did. Okay; I'll touch that up.
--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
ahs3@...hat.com
-----------------------------------
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists