[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E883BB7E94A@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 23:27:01 +0000
From: "Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
CC: "Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>, Lv Zheng <zetalog@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI / tables: Move table override mechanisms to
tables.c
Hi,
> From: rjwysocki@...il.com [mailto:rjwysocki@...il.com] On Behalf Of
> Rafael J. Wysocki
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 9:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI / tables: Move table override mechanisms to
> tables.c
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 4:16 AM, Zheng, Lv <lv.zheng@...el.com> wrote:
> > Hi, Rafael
>
> Hi,
>
> >> From: Zheng, Lv
> >> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI / tables: Move table override mechanisms to
> >> tables.c
> >>
> >> This patch moves acpi_os_table_override() and
> >> acpi_os_physical_table_override() to tables.c.
> >>
>
> [cut]
>
> >> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_INITRD_TABLE_OVERRIDE
> >> -void acpi_initrd_override(void *data, size_t size);
> >> +void early_acpi_table_init(void *data, size_t size);
> >> #else
> >> -static inline void acpi_initrd_override(void *data, size_t size)
> >> +static inline void early_acpi_table_init(void *data, size_t size)
> >> {
> >> }
> >> #endif
> > [Lv Zheng]
> > This block was wrong.
> > early_acpi_table_init() is no longer dependent on
> CONFIG_ACPI_INITRD_TABLE_OVERRIDE but dependent on CONFIG_ACPI.
>
> I see.
>
> > Updated v2 patches are sent to the mailing list.
>
> Is this the only difference between v1 and v2?
[Lv Zheng]
One of the follow-up patches (PATCH 3) in this series is updated accordingly.
Thanks and best regards
-Lv
Powered by blists - more mailing lists