[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e3fb151e-8d79-439d-9eea-131a23f1d48c@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 19:24:07 +1000
From: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev, x86@...nel.org, Russell King
<linux@...linux.org.uk>, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Miguel Luis <miguel.luis@...cle.com>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, linuxarm@...wei.com,
justin.he@....com, jianyong.wu@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 03/16] ACPI: processor: Drop duplicated check on _STA
(enabled + present)
On 4/18/24 23:53, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> The ACPI bus scan will only result in acpi_processor_add() being called
> if _STA has already been checked and the result is that the
> processor is enabled and present. Hence drop this additional check.
>
> Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
>
> ---
> v7: No change
> v6: New patch to drop this unnecessary code. Now I think we only
> need to explicitly read STA to print a warning in the ARM64
> arch_unregister_cpu() path where we want to know if the
> present bit has been unset as well.
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 6 ------
> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>
Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists