[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190924120734.GT2680@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 15:07:34 +0300
From: "Shevchenko, Andriy" <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Nikolaus Voss <nikolaus.voss@...wensteinmedical.de>
Cc: "Schmauss, Erik" <erik.schmauss@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, devel@...ica.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nv@...n.de,
Ferry Toth <fntoth@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPICA: Introduce acpi_load_table_with_index()
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 11:47:01AM +0200, Nikolaus Voss wrote:
> For unloading an ACPI table, it is necessary to provide the
> index of the table. The method intended for dynamically
> loading or hotplug addition of tables, acpi_load_table(),
> does not provide this information, so a new function
> acpi_load_table_with_index() with the same functionality,
> but an optional pointer to the loaded table index is introduced.
>
> The new function is used in the acpi_configfs driver to save the
> index of the newly loaded table in order to unload it later.
I'll test it later, though couple of remarks:
- would it make sense to provide a counter part helper for unloading? Now it
looks a bit inconsistent in configfs when we use acpi_load_*() vs.
acpi_tb_*() in remove.
- please, include Ferry into Cc (as done in this mail)
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists