[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <93fd7ed0-5311-d6db-4d8b-b992a8f78ada@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 08:17:56 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@...rix.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
jgross@...e.com, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] acpi/processor: fix evaluating _PDC method when
running as Xen dom0
On 12/2/22 04:24, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On the implementation side, is the proposed approach acceptable?
> Mostly asking because it adds Xen conditionals to otherwise generic
> ACPI code.
That's a good Rafael question.
But, how do other places in the ACPI code handle things like this?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists