From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 961DEC43463 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 13:35:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE742388B for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 13:35:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1600436107; bh=zT8ZYf6HAY8CT+9OanHLVNB/5V6UrbKfcIDiuma43YM=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=0I9Z+wO+t5KwcpqGVyKS6lS2Mp5d/A9DKpx3NwSDIGWcVfVqPybnZ7Eq9e8C9sqRl HNCEInFO99aaAucOVtO6HHLlrNX/pgh4NvBzqkVRLDaW1XKyGdWmzrze7abu7+Hq1C donWRn9xo7WEAoiMpOKLrMaMkGkH21B61rP1OR9o= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726415AbgIRNfG (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2020 09:35:06 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f66.google.com ([209.85.210.66]:41093 "EHLO mail-ot1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726126AbgIRNfF (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2020 09:35:05 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f66.google.com with SMTP id q21so5368554ota.8 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 06:35:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=n+0kkhU8gsRY+Vrl8rc76bI/5mC1y5tv6JjBptgH/Uw=; b=IiO/cgABjkgN+GhpYYNbYzA0KES+kdRWnuNvBRZ6JWjSJTMEz9JY0PoKmsdoG35UC5 Y7H5RuxvwzxTXtjQFGtD0j+h/FIF5/ghCOmPpx/C91M/FwtZAnue+YnptzvkpC3DCA2R U7Mc3i+S6QKjSe19CwmDioQmXnoYaZ3hdZJMQOr24xJ0reGgDDcU0v0EMQbH2td/0Kdn WNPF3sUT6VEKgFYdjdceRjw8Ka5ZtJ/y4MXVUCbSbmyZH26lq9GeYSushx3dvANI54hd SfZkwdg2oqsnPIDOsYmCvwIHKcy/0flV48CFEtkXjq7Bmb8VbaPNICT+SK+nud7L6L+D WkNw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5312Y7D3mujlRQPWKIjUraUtOWp6vxHqC7yQgTPifrHhGNCE6Jju zzd1s4Q5l5ZdUrjrcd3o+PbfYGCGMuB/uUWwXoYwO9wz X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJws7clcbZajPMCJOYUZBD0S6quICoLIHwcEToO89m7cL2w2s2Iow05mlgiFbwPXHqi3W2AfaJxpcteLnYwzZac= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:150a:: with SMTP id k10mr21769944otp.167.1600436104404; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 06:35:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1600328345-27627-1-git-send-email-guohanjun@huawei.com> <28154b60-b07b-24e7-748f-88359d5343cb@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <28154b60-b07b-24e7-748f-88359d5343cb@huawei.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:34:52 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] ACPI: First step to decouple ACPICA debug functionality from ACPI driver To: Hanjun Guo Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , ACPI Devel Maling List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 3:55 AM Hanjun Guo wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > On 2020/9/17 23:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Hi Hanjun, > > > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 10:34 AM Hanjun Guo wrote: > >> > >> For now, ACPI driver debug functionality is mixed of pr_* functions and > >> ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT() which is provided ACPICA core directly, ACPICA debug > >> functions are not friendly for users and also make ACPICA core deeply > >> coupled with ACPI drivers. > >> > >> With the evolution of the ACPI driver code, lots of the ACPICA debug > >> functions used in ACPI drivers were removed away, this makes the ACPICA > >> debug in ACPI driver to be fragile, for example, some of the COMPONENT > >> such as ACPI_CONTAINER_COMPONENT and ACPI_MEMORY_DEVICE_COMPONENT are not > >> used anymore, they leaved as dead code. > >> > >> From another aspert, removing the ACPICA debug functions didn't raise > >> concerns in the past, so I believe the ACPICA debug in ACPI driver can be > >> removed and replace with equivalent pr_* debug functions, then decouple > >> ACPICA debug functionality from ACPI driver. > > > > This is a worthy goal, but the patch series appears to be a mixed bag > > of changes some of which are not directly related to this goal. > > Sorry for that, I sent this patch set in a hurry, I will update > as you suggested. > > > > >> In order to decouple ACPICA debug functionality from ACPI driver, I do it > >> in two steps: > >> - Remove the dead ACPICA functionality code, and remove the not used > >> COMPONENT; > >> - Remove all the ACPICA debug code from ACPI drivers. > >> > >> This patch set is the first step to decouple ACPICA debug functionality > >> from ACPI driver, just remove the dead ACPICA functionality code and > >> some cleanups for ACPI drivers, should no functional change if you don't > >> apply the last two patches. > >> > >> Patch 1/25 ~ patch 23/25 are removing the dead code and cleanups; > >> Patch 24/25 ~ patch 25/25 are the actual ABI change. > >> > >> If the ABI change is making sense, I will go further to remove the > >> ACPICA debug functionality from ACPI driver, just keep it inside > >> the ACPICA core. > >> > >> Hanjun Guo (25): > >> ACPI: cmos_rtc: Remove the ACPI_MODULE_NAME() > > > > This, for example, should be a separate cleanup patch. > > ACPI_MODULE_NAME() and _COMPONENT are both used for ACPICA > debug functionality, so I will put them in the decouple > patch set. So if the ACPICA debug functionality is not used in the given C file, you can drop these macros from there right away without any side effects. Why don't you do that in a separate series of patches then? Thanks!