From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hoan Tran Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] acpi: cppc: Allow build with ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS config Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 09:58:45 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1470874646-70570-1-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> <1470874646-70570-2-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> <1471020739.3745.10.camel@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-ua0-f179.google.com ([209.85.217.179]:35996 "EHLO mail-ua0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752600AbcHLQ6q (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Aug 2016 12:58:46 -0400 Received: by mail-ua0-f179.google.com with SMTP id 97so50946474uav.3 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 09:58:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1471020739.3745.10.camel@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Srinivas Pandruvada Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , viresh.kumar@linaro.org, linux acpi , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Ashwin Chaugule Hi Srinivas, On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote: > On Fri, 2016-08-12 at 09:35 -0700, Hoan Tran wrote: >> Hi Srinivas, >> >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Srinivas Pandruvada >> wrote: >> > >> > Some newer x86 platforms have support for both _CPC and _PSS >> > object. So >> > kernel config can have both ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS and ACPI_CPPC_LIB. So >> > remove >> > restriction for ACPI_CPPC_LIB to build only when ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS >> > is not >> > defined. >> > Also for legacy systems with only _PSS, we shouldn't bail out if >> > acpi_cppc_processor_probe() fails, if ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS is also >> > defined. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada > > .com> >> > --- >> > drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 1 - >> > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 5 ++++- >> > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> > index 445ce28..c6bb6aa 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> > @@ -227,7 +227,6 @@ config ACPI_MCFG >> > config ACPI_CPPC_LIB >> > bool >> > depends on ACPI_PROCESSOR >> > - depends on !ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS >> From ACPI 6.1 spec, if _CPC is present, its use supersedes the use of >> PSS. So I think, config ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS should depend on >> !ACPI_CPPC_LIB. >> > Distro want to have a single binary kernel image, so they will turn on > all configs. So this is not a compile time decision. > On runtime if the ACPI contains both tables than _CPC should be used > (but that also if the kernel is capable of handling _CPC, as legacy > kernel will not). Agreed. If so, this "depends on" is not need, right ? And a runtime code will be added to decide which is used instead ? Thanks Hoan > > Thanks, > Srinivas > >> Thanks >> Hoan >> >> > >> > select MAILBOX >> > select PCC >> > help >> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> > b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> > index 0553aee..0e0b629 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> > @@ -245,8 +245,11 @@ static int __acpi_processor_start(struct >> > acpi_device *device) >> > return 0; >> > >> > result = acpi_cppc_processor_probe(pr); >> > - if (result) >> > + if (result) { >> > +#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS >> > return -ENODEV; >> > +#endif >> > + } >> > >> > if (!cpuidle_get_driver() || cpuidle_get_driver() == >> > &acpi_idle_driver) >> > acpi_processor_power_init(pr); >> > -- >> > 2.7.4 >> > >> > -- >> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux- >> > acpi" in >> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" >> in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html