From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933457AbbCROmt (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2015 10:42:49 -0400 Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:54484 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S933376AbbCROmk convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2015 10:42:40 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Lorenzo Pieralisi , Hanjun Guo Cc: "guohanjun@huawei.com" , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Olof Johansson , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , Arnd Bergmann , Mark Rutland , "graeme.gregory@linaro.org" , Sudeep Holla , "jcm@redhat.com" , Marc Zyngier , Mark Brown , Robert Richter , Timur Tabi , Ashwin Chaugule , "suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" , Al Stone Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 18/21] ARM64 / ACPI: Select ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY if ACPI is enabled on ARM64 Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 16:06:35 +0100 Message-ID: <18318670.U16Joq6nSS@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.19.0+; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20150318091820.GB2846@red-moon> References: <1426077587-1561-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <5506BF89.9040703@linaro.org> <20150318091820.GB2846@red-moon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 09:18:20 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:33:29AM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote: > > On 2015年03月13日 19:04, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 03:28:45AM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > >>> /* > > >>> * acpi_boot_table_init() called from setup_arch(), always. > > >>> * 1. find RSDP and get its address, and then find XSDT > > >>> * 2. extract all tables and checksums them all > > >>> * 3. check ACPI FADT revision > > >>> + * 4. check ACPI FADT HW reduced flag > > >>> * > > >>> * We can parse ACPI boot-time tables such as MADT after > > >>> * this function is called. > > >>> */ > > >>> void __init acpi_boot_table_init(void) > > >>> { > > >>> + struct acpi_table_header *table; > > >>> + struct acpi_table_fadt *fadt; > > >>> + acpi_status status; > > >>> + acpi_size tbl_size; > > >>> + > > >>> /* > > >>> * Enable ACPI instead of device tree unless > > >>> * - ACPI has been disabled explicitly (acpi=off), or > > >>> @@ -351,19 +318,52 @@ void __init acpi_boot_table_init(void) > > >>> (!param_acpi_force && of_scan_flat_dt(dt_scan_depth1_nodes, NULL))) > > >>> return; > > >>> > > >>> - enable_acpi(); > > >>> - > > >>> /* Initialize the ACPI boot-time table parser. */ > > >>> if (acpi_table_init()) { > > >> > > >> Since we disable ACPI in default, it is a bit strange for me to init all > > >> the ACPI tables and parse FADT when ACPI is disabled, could you > > >> put some comments here to clarify the purpose? other than that, it is looks > > >> good to me. > > > > > > Ok, the purpose was to make things simpler, but I think that given > > > current code it is not 100% safe to init ACPI tables with > > > acpi_disabled == 1. > > > > > > To me having to enable ACPI to parse the tables and check *if* ACPI tables > > > are there is a bit crazy, but I agree with you that given current code > > > it is safer. > > > > > > Patch rewritten, here below, please have a look, test it and rework > > > bits as needed, I added comments where I thought they were needed but > > > please add to that if you feel it is worth it. > > > > > > It should be easy to split, let me know if you want an incremental > > > version. > > > > This one is much better, pretty fine to me, thanks! > > > > I assume that this patch is cleanup patch on top of ARM64 ACPI > > core patches, right? > > For the records, I created a branch with my patch split over some > of your patches, even though I think to make things simpler it is best > to apply it as a single patch on top of your series, I agree. In particular, the patches that have already been reviewed and ACKed won't need to be reviewed again this way which seems to be crucially important to me. > I will prepare the commit log for the single patch version too. Thanks! Hanjun, please add this one to the series when ready. -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.