From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751333AbdH1VDs (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2017 17:03:48 -0400 Received: from cloudserver094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:45997 "EHLO cloudserver094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751269AbdH1VDr (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2017 17:03:47 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Toshi Kani , mchehab@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list() Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 22:55:07 +0200 Message-ID: <1587060.BVEodWPrhf@aspire.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <20170824075348.gqvobmk7mf5ppaip@pd.tnic> References: <20170823225447.15608-1-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20170823225447.15608-2-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20170824075348.gqvobmk7mf5ppaip@pd.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, August 24, 2017 9:53:48 AM CEST Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 04:54:43PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > > ACPI OEM ID / OEM Table ID / Revision can be used to identify > > a platform based on ACPI firmware info. acpi_blacklisted(), > > intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(), and some other funcs, > > have been using similar check to detect a list of platforms > > that require special handlings. > > > > Move the platform check in acpi_blacklisted() to a new common > > utility function, acpi_match_platform_list(), so that other > > drivers do not have to implement their own version. > > > > There is no change in functionality. > > > > Signed-off-by: Toshi Kani > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" > > Cc: Borislav Petkov > > --- > > drivers/acpi/blacklist.c | 83 ++++++++-------------------------------------- > > drivers/acpi/utils.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++ > > include/linux/acpi.h | 19 +++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-) > > ... > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/utils.c b/drivers/acpi/utils.c > > index b9d956c..0a9e597 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/utils.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/utils.c > > @@ -816,3 +816,39 @@ static int __init acpi_backlight(char *str) > > return 1; > > } > > __setup("acpi_backlight=", acpi_backlight); > > + > > +/** > > + * acpi_match_platform_list - Check if the system matches with a given list > > + * @plat: pointer to acpi_platform_list table terminated by a NULL entry > > + * > > + * Return the matched index if the system is found in the platform list. > > + * Otherwise, return a negative error code. > > + */ > > +int acpi_match_platform_list(const struct acpi_platform_list *plat) > > +{ > > + struct acpi_table_header hdr; > > + int idx = 0; > > + > > + if (acpi_disabled) > > + return -ENODEV; > > + > > + for (; plat->oem_id[0]; plat++, idx++) { > > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(acpi_get_table_header(plat->table, 0, &hdr))) > > + continue; > > + > > + if (strncmp(plat->oem_id, hdr.oem_id, ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE)) > > + continue; > > + > > + if (strncmp(plat->oem_table_id, hdr.oem_table_id, ACPI_OEM_TABLE_ID_SIZE)) > > + continue; > > + > > + if ((plat->pred == all_versions) || > > + (plat->pred == less_than_or_equal && hdr.oem_revision <= plat->oem_revision) || > > + (plat->pred == greater_than_or_equal && hdr.oem_revision >= plat->oem_revision) || > > + (plat->pred == equal && hdr.oem_revision == plat->oem_revision)) > > If you align the second part of the test like this: > > if ((plat->pred == all_versions) || > (plat->pred == less_than_or_equal && hdr.oem_revision <= plat->oem_revision) || > (plat->pred == greater_than_or_equal && hdr.oem_revision >= plat->oem_revision) || > (plat->pred == equal && hdr.oem_revision == plat->oem_revision)) > > it gets maximally readable. But I'd leave that up to Rafael when committing > - no need to send another version. > > Other than that: > > Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov OK So what about the [3-5/5] in this series? My current plan is to apply them too and expose a branch with them, can I go ahead with that? Thanks, Rafael