From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com (Stefano Stabellini) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 11:24:49 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v3 05/62] acpi: Don't do traditional BIOS table scan for ARM64 In-Reply-To: <1447753261-7552-6-git-send-email-shannon.zhao@linaro.org> References: <1447753261-7552-1-git-send-email-shannon.zhao@linaro.org> <1447753261-7552-6-git-send-email-shannon.zhao@linaro.org> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, shannon.zhao at linaro.org wrote: > From: Shannon Zhao > > With the addition of ARM64 that does not have a traditional BIOS to > scan, add a #ifdef option for x86 to do the traditional BIOS scanning > for tables. > > Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao > --- > xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c > index ce15470..db74a90 100644 > --- a/xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c > @@ -78,7 +78,9 @@ acpi_physical_address __init acpi_os_get_root_pointer(void) > } else { > acpi_physical_address pa = 0; > > + #ifdef CONFIG_X86 > acpi_find_root_pointer(&pa); > + #endif > return pa; > } I think it might be best to error out earlier if acpi and !efi_enabled on arm and arm64. If we do that we'll never enter this "else". If acpi_find_root_pointer doesn't build on arm, we should move it to an x86 specific location, such as xen/arch/x86/efi. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefano Stabellini Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/62] acpi: Don't do traditional BIOS table scan for ARM64 Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 11:24:49 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1447753261-7552-1-git-send-email-shannon.zhao@linaro.org> <1447753261-7552-6-git-send-email-shannon.zhao@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1447753261-7552-6-git-send-email-shannon.zhao@linaro.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: shannon.zhao@linaro.org Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, hangaohuai@huawei.com, keir@xen.org, ian.campbell@citrix.com, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, peter.huangpeng@huawei.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, julien.grall@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jbeulich@suse.com, zhaoshenglong@huawei.com, roger.pau@citrix.com, christoffer.dall@linaro.org, david.vrabel@citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, shannon.zhao@linaro.org wrote: > From: Shannon Zhao > > With the addition of ARM64 that does not have a traditional BIOS to > scan, add a #ifdef option for x86 to do the traditional BIOS scanning > for tables. > > Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao > --- > xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c > index ce15470..db74a90 100644 > --- a/xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/osl.c > @@ -78,7 +78,9 @@ acpi_physical_address __init acpi_os_get_root_pointer(void) > } else { > acpi_physical_address pa = 0; > > + #ifdef CONFIG_X86 > acpi_find_root_pointer(&pa); > + #endif > return pa; > } I think it might be best to error out earlier if acpi and !efi_enabled on arm and arm64. If we do that we'll never enter this "else". If acpi_find_root_pointer doesn't build on arm, we should move it to an x86 specific location, such as xen/arch/x86/efi.