[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1503503170.2042.172.camel@hpe.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 15:56:05 +0000
From: "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>
To: "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"mchehab@...nel.org" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com"
<srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] intel_pstate: convert to use
acpi_match_platform_list()
On Wed, 2017-08-23 at 17:46 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 01:46:41PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > Convert to use acpi_match_platform_list() for the platform check.
> > There is no change in functionality.
> >
:
>
> Btw, why is that ACPI_SIG_FADT's description not "FADT" ?
>
> #define ACPI_SIG_FADT "FACP" /* Fixed ACPI Description
> Table */
>
> More ACPI fun? I don't think I can take any more fun.
Yes, more ACPI fun. :-) According to the spec:
‘FACP’. Signature for the Fixed ACPI Description Table. (This signature
predates ACPI 1.0, explaining the mismatch with this table's name.)
> Oh well,
>
> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Thanks!
-Toshi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists