[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <745c9e29-f0b4-775b-28f7-8712cdc90fe1@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 15:49:43 -0600
From: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
To: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...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>, graeme.gregory@...aro.org,
mark.salter@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi, spcr: Make SPCR available to x86
On 01/18/2018 09:09 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> if (acpi_disabled) {
> - if (earlycon_init_is_deferred)
> + if (earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable)
This patch works for me, so I can ACK it, but first you might want to
rename earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable, because these two lines don't make
much sense.
"If ACPI is disabled, and ACPI SCPR is enabled, then ...."
If ACPI is disabled, then how can a variable called
"earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable" be true?
Would it make more sense to rename it to earlycon_spcr_enable?
--
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