From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga08-in.huawei.com (szxga08-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.255]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33B0C1F4C9F; Thu, 19 Jun 2025 14:42:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.255 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750344159; cv=none; b=F4gQExces4hbQ55VV2Ly8tHJUnh4LNQBoJNSW/DEafTtjfqCUbv/R8LsY4eEguvR4R107L0KLKsJ89b9Pi0orlxu3smRcT0zdORjxCjJD35Ex4xQf4rGhrY3/ZhCLjaKsv4L463oRQCqEO87A5pZUbAqXaXOY2qOggv8eTitIM0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750344159; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gdTGjd6pcw2UEWFBhdQNIPDZSoY1C0kjX28xf7y7oe8=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=tfKZ/exbRyRmJIvKUjcWY39+xsZ3LmoL2oRAaCaIAJ8zNkIrhxN26V38aDT3rYPBWZFjDRGmdDP2QTg3HucoOZhoG3D7EbACgSucE/WHUNxXNGst6qi/CVgASdd7bpoRCdOgfcUvl2JDVPTYO18cs4E2wf89UhNhUP6v/Nne1tE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.255 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.174]) by szxga08-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4bNNYt6MQ2z1d1qs; Thu, 19 Jun 2025 22:40:18 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemf500002.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.57]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3B2E14011A; Thu, 19 Jun 2025 22:42:31 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.178.247] (10.174.178.247) by dggpemf500002.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.57) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Thu, 19 Jun 2025 22:42:30 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ACPI: Improve SPCR handling and messaging on SPCR-less systems To: Li Chen , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Liu Wei , Ryan Roberts , Andrew Morton , Jonathan Cameron , Li Chen , Sudeep Holla , , , References: <20250606072802.191580-1-me@linux.beauty> From: Hanjun Guo Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 22:42:29 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20250606072802.191580-1-me@linux.beauty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems100001.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.238) To dggpemf500002.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.57) Hi Li Chen, On 2025/6/6 15:27, Li Chen wrote: > From: Li Chen > > This small series improves the kernel behavior and output when the ACPI SPCR > table is not present or not supported. > > Currently, even on systems that completely lack an SPCR table, the kernel prints: > "Use ACPI SPCR as default console: Yes" Agreed, this is wrong, we need to fix it. > > Or if with acpi=nospcr: > "Use ACPI SPCR as default console: No" I think this is OK, it's just to let you know we are not using ACPI SPCR console when ACPI is enabled, including cases with no SPCR table. > > This may mislead users into thinking an SPCR table exists > when in fact there is no such table at all. This series addresses this in two steps: > > Patch 1 ensures that acpi_parse_spcr() returns -ENODEV if CONFIG_ACPI_SPCR_TABLE is disabled. > > Patch 2 updates arm64 acpi_boot_table_init() to only print the SPCR console message > if acpi_parse_spcr() succeeds. I have some detail comments for patch 2. Thanks Hanjun