[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6541a055-bfd4-daa7-5b91-38384bd65c3f@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 08:08:08 -0600
From: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@...hat.com>,
Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, graeme.gregory@...aro.org,
mark.salter@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] acpi, spcr: Make SPCR avialable to other
architectures
On 12/14/17 4:30 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>> I didn't want to put any ACPI code in amba-pl011.c, so putting it in spcr.c
>> made the most sense. I agree the global variable is ugly. If you have a
>> better idea, I'm all ears.
> I told you my idea. It could have been made easier by reusing the
> ACPI_DECLARE_PROBE_ENTRY() mechanism.
Sorry, I don't mean to be difficult, but when did you tell *me* this
idea of yours? I don't see any email from you to me that mentions
ACPI_DECLARE_PROBE_ENTRY(). I've never even heard of that macro before.
Please note that I'm not the original author of this code.
--
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists