* [RFC PATCH] x86/acpi: Drop duplicate BOOT table initialization
@ 2019-11-15 5:06 Shiyang Ruan
2019-11-15 9:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Shiyang Ruan @ 2019-11-15 5:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: x86, linux-pm, linux-kernel
Cc: rjw, len.brown, pavel, tglx, mingo, bp, hpa, Cao jin
From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
ACPI BOOT table is initialized in both acpi_boot_table_init &
acpi_boot_init of setup_arch, but its usage is quite late at the end of
start_kernel. It should be safe to drop one of them. Since it is less
related with table init, drop it from there.
Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
It existed since git repo is built, so it might has its reason? The
patch is not tested since I don't have BOOT table in my firmware.
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
index 04205ce127a1..ca1c15bb0b48 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
@@ -1558,8 +1558,6 @@ void __init acpi_boot_table_init(void)
return;
}
- acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_BOOT, acpi_parse_sbf);
-
/*
* blacklist may disable ACPI entirely
*/
--
2.21.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/acpi: Drop duplicate BOOT table initialization
2019-11-15 5:06 [RFC PATCH] x86/acpi: Drop duplicate BOOT table initialization Shiyang Ruan
@ 2019-11-15 9:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-11-15 9:18 ` Cao jin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2019-11-15 9:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shiyang Ruan
Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers, Linux PM, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Len Brown, Pavel Machek, Thomas Gleixner,
Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, H. Peter Anvin, Cao jin
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 6:06 AM Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>
> ACPI BOOT table is initialized in both acpi_boot_table_init &
> acpi_boot_init of setup_arch, but its usage is quite late at the end of
> start_kernel. It should be safe to drop one of them. Since it is less
> related with table init, drop it from there.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Please resend with a CC to linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> It existed since git repo is built, so it might has its reason? The
> patch is not tested since I don't have BOOT table in my firmware.
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> index 04205ce127a1..ca1c15bb0b48 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> @@ -1558,8 +1558,6 @@ void __init acpi_boot_table_init(void)
> return;
> }
>
> - acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_BOOT, acpi_parse_sbf);
> -
> /*
> * blacklist may disable ACPI entirely
> */
> --
> 2.21.0
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/acpi: Drop duplicate BOOT table initialization
2019-11-15 9:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2019-11-15 9:18 ` Cao jin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Cao jin @ 2019-11-15 9:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Shiyang Ruan
Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers, Linux PM, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Len Brown, Pavel Machek, Thomas Gleixner,
Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, H. Peter Anvin
On 11/15/19 5:09 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 6:06 AM Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>
>> ACPI BOOT table is initialized in both acpi_boot_table_init &
>> acpi_boot_init of setup_arch, but its usage is quite late at the end of
>> start_kernel. It should be safe to drop one of them. Since it is less
>> related with table init, drop it from there.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>
> Please resend with a CC to linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
>
Sure. It is better to let get_maintainer.pl tell the whole list.
--
Sincerely,
Cao jin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/acpi: Drop duplicate BOOT table initialization
2019-11-15 9:24 Shiyang Ruan
2019-11-29 11:11 ` Cao jin
@ 2019-12-12 22:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2019-12-12 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shiyang Ruan
Cc: x86, linux-pm, linux-kernel, len.brown, pavel, tglx, mingo, bp,
hpa, Cao jin, linux-acpi
On Friday, November 15, 2019 10:24:24 AM CET Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>
> ACPI BOOT table is initialized in both acpi_boot_table_init &
> acpi_boot_init of setup_arch, but its usage is quite late at the end of
> start_kernel. It should be safe to drop one of them. Since it is less
> related with table init, drop it from there.
Well, "It should be safe to drop one of them" is kind of a weak justification.
I need to be convinced that one of them is redundant. At this point I am not.
> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> It existed since git repo is built, so it might has its reason? The
> patch is not tested since I don't have BOOT table in my firmware.
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> index 04205ce127a1..ca1c15bb0b48 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> @@ -1558,8 +1558,6 @@ void __init acpi_boot_table_init(void)
> return;
> }
>
> - acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_BOOT, acpi_parse_sbf);
> -
> /*
> * blacklist may disable ACPI entirely
> */
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/acpi: Drop duplicate BOOT table initialization
2019-11-15 9:24 Shiyang Ruan
@ 2019-11-29 11:11 ` Cao jin
2019-12-12 22:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Cao jin @ 2019-11-29 11:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shiyang Ruan, x86, linux-pm, linux-kernel
Cc: rjw, len.brown, pavel, tglx, mingo, bp, hpa, linux-acpi
Ping?
--
Sincerely,
Cao jin
On 11/15/19 5:24 PM, Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>
> ACPI BOOT table is initialized in both acpi_boot_table_init &
> acpi_boot_init of setup_arch, but its usage is quite late at the end of
> start_kernel. It should be safe to drop one of them. Since it is less
> related with table init, drop it from there.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> It existed since git repo is built, so it might has its reason? The
> patch is not tested since I don't have BOOT table in my firmware.
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> index 04205ce127a1..ca1c15bb0b48 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> @@ -1558,8 +1558,6 @@ void __init acpi_boot_table_init(void)
> return;
> }
>
> - acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_BOOT, acpi_parse_sbf);
> -
> /*
> * blacklist may disable ACPI entirely
> */
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [RFC PATCH] x86/acpi: Drop duplicate BOOT table initialization
@ 2019-11-15 9:24 Shiyang Ruan
2019-11-29 11:11 ` Cao jin
2019-12-12 22:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Shiyang Ruan @ 2019-11-15 9:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: x86, linux-pm, linux-kernel
Cc: rjw, len.brown, pavel, tglx, mingo, bp, hpa, Cao jin, linux-acpi
From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
ACPI BOOT table is initialized in both acpi_boot_table_init &
acpi_boot_init of setup_arch, but its usage is quite late at the end of
start_kernel. It should be safe to drop one of them. Since it is less
related with table init, drop it from there.
Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
It existed since git repo is built, so it might has its reason? The
patch is not tested since I don't have BOOT table in my firmware.
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
index 04205ce127a1..ca1c15bb0b48 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
@@ -1558,8 +1558,6 @@ void __init acpi_boot_table_init(void)
return;
}
- acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_BOOT, acpi_parse_sbf);
-
/*
* blacklist may disable ACPI entirely
*/
--
2.21.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-12-12 22:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-11-15 5:06 [RFC PATCH] x86/acpi: Drop duplicate BOOT table initialization Shiyang Ruan
2019-11-15 9:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-11-15 9:18 ` Cao jin
2019-11-15 9:24 Shiyang Ruan
2019-11-29 11:11 ` Cao jin
2019-12-12 22:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).