[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f8f0b7ee-b225-eff0-cfcc-bb43e9e520dc@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 22:02:31 +0800
From: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...el.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ACPI: let BIOS fall back to legacy handling if PRM
disabled
On 7/2/21 7:37 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 9:03 AM Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...el.com> wrote:
>>
>> Based on _OSC PRM bit, BIOS can choose switch from legacy handling
>> to using PRM. So if CONFIG_ACPI_PRMT is disabled, this bit should
>> not be set to let BIOS fall back to the legacy handling (such as SMI).
>>
>> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/bus.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
>> index 60fb6a84..30a3d4a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
>> @@ -303,7 +303,9 @@ static void acpi_bus_osc_negotiate_platform_control(void)
>>
>> capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD] |= OSC_SB_HOTPLUG_OST_SUPPORT;
>> capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD] |= OSC_SB_PCLPI_SUPPORT;
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_PRMT
>> capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD] |= OSC_SB_PRM_SUPPORT;
>> +#endif
>
> What about using if (IS_ENABLED()) instead of #ifdef?
aha, sorry, using if (IS_ENABLED()) is better, will come up with a new version soon.
Thanks,
-Aubrey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists