From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: al.stone@linaro.org
Cc: lenb@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
robert.moore@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
fenghua.yu@intel.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
devel@acpica.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org,
patches@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI: add arch-specific compilation for _OSI and the blacklist
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 15:03:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2903181.4VVp3X75UK@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2298661.ffvhncbLpr@vostro.rjw.lan>
On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 03:00:15 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 03, 2015 05:21:42 PM al.stone@linaro.org wrote:
> > From: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
> >
> > Now that all of the _OSI functionality has been separated out, we can
> > provide arch-specific functionality for it. This also allows us to do
> > the same for the acpi_blacklisted() function.
> >
> > Whether arch-specific functions are used or not now depends on the config
> > options CONFIG_ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI and CONFIG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_BLACKLIST.
> > By default, both are set false which causes the x86/ia64 versions to be
> > used, just as is done today. Setting one or both of these options true
> > will cause architecture-specific implementations to be built instead; this
> > patch also provides arm64 implementations.
> >
> > For x86/ia64, there is no functional change.
> >
> > For arm64, any use of _OSI will issue a warning that it is deprecated.
> > All use of _OSI will return false -- i.e., it will return no useful
> > information to any firmware using it. The ability to temporarily turn
> > on _OSI, or turn off _OSI, or affect it in other ways from the command
> > line is no longer available for arm64, either. The blacklist for ACPI
> > on arm64 is empty. This will, of course, require ACPI to be enabled
> > for arm64.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/acpi/Makefile | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> > drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/acpi/blacklist.c | 5 +++++
> > drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 5 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c
> > create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> > index 3e3bd35..4190940 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> > @@ -369,6 +369,28 @@ config ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY
> >
> > If you are unsure what to do, do not enable this option.
> >
> > +config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>
> I woulnd't make this and the other one user-selectable. Let architectures
> select them from their top-level Kconfig files.
>
> That's what we do with the other CONFIG_ARCH_ things.
>
> So in the architecture-specific Kconfig you'll have
>
> config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
> def_bool n
> depends on ACPI
>
> Moreover, I'd call that ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI.
Or even better, you can define them here (drivers/acpi/Kconfig/) as
config ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI
def_bool n
and then do
select ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI if ACPI
as you did in [4/5].
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-04 13:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-04 0:21 [PATCH v2 0/5] Start deprecating _OSI on new architectures al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] ACPI: move acpi_os_handler() so it can be made arch-dependent later al.stone
2015-02-04 13:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 22:44 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 23:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 23:49 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] ACPI: move _OSI support functions to allow arch-dependent implementation al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI: add arch-specific compilation for _OSI and the blacklist al.stone
2015-02-04 14:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 14:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2015-02-04 22:46 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] ACPI: arm64: use the arch-specific ACPI _OSI method and ACPI blacklist al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] ACPI: arm64: use "Linux" as ACPI_OS_NAME for _OS on arm64 al.stone
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2903181.4VVp3X75UK@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=al.stone@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=devel@acpica.org \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®