From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751971AbbCVVZc (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2015 17:25:32 -0400 Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:65172 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751832AbbCVVZa (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2015 17:25:30 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Julien Grall Cc: Naresh Bhat , Hanjun Guo , Hanjun Guo , Jon Fraser , Parth Dixit , Stefano Stabellini , Catalin Marinas , Olof Johansson , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , Lorenzo Pieralisi , 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" , Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/21] Introduce ACPI for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1 Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 22:49:30 +0100 Message-ID: <2189259.UNlTC1BNmt@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.19.0+; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <550F2E91.7010109@linaro.org> References: <1426077587-1561-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <550F2E91.7010109@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit 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 Sunday, March 22, 2015 09:05:21 PM Julien Grall wrote: > Hello, > > On 21/03/2015 12:09, Naresh Bhat wrote: > > From 268dcdafa34a690e2f99c0784ca33a6d2352ecf5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Hanjun Guo > > > Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 14:43:54 +0800 > > Subject: [PATCH] XEN / ACPI: Make XEN ACPI depend on X86 > > > > When ACPI is enabled on ARM64, XEN ACPI will also compiled > > into the kernel, but XEN ACPI is x86 dependent, so introduce > > CONFIG_XEN_ACPI to make it depend on x86 before XEN ACPI is > > functional on ARM64. > > > > Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo > > > > --- > > drivers/xen/Kconfig | 4 ++++ > > drivers/xen/Makefile | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/Kconfig b/drivers/xen/Kconfig > > index b812462..a31cd29 100644 > > --- a/drivers/xen/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/xen/Kconfig > > @@ -253,4 +253,8 @@ config XEN_EFI > > def_bool y > > depends on X86_64 && EFI > > > > +config XEN_ACPI > > + def_bool y > > + depends on X86 && ACPI > > + > > endmenu > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/Makefile b/drivers/xen/Makefile > > index 2ccd359..f4622ab 100644 > > --- a/drivers/xen/Makefile > > +++ b/drivers/xen/Makefile > > @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ CFLAGS_efi.o += -fshort-wchar > > > > dom0-$(CONFIG_PCI) += pci.o > > dom0-$(CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT) += dbgp.o > > -dom0-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += acpi.o $(xen-pad-y) > > +dom0-$(CONFIG_XEN_ACPI) += acpi.o $(xen-pad-y) > > xen-pad-$(CONFIG_X86) += xen-acpi-pad.o > > dom0-$(CONFIG_X86) += pcpu.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_DOM0) += $(dom0-y) > > [..] > > > > > AFAIK, There is already a kernel patch exists to fix this issue. I > > think Julien or Parth is a right person to ask. Hence I am CCed Julien > > Grall too. > > The ACPI support for Xen is not ready. So I think avoiding to compile > drivers/xen/acpi.c on ARM64/ARM seems the better solution for now. > > Although, rather than introducing a new CONFIG option, I would use the > same trick we use within the Makefile to avoid hotplug.c on ARM/ARM64. > > ifeq ($(filter y, $(CONFIG_ARM) $(CONFIG_ARM64)), ) > dom0-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += acpi.o $(xen-pad-y) > endif Well, is avoiding an extra CONFIG_ option worth the ugliness of this? -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.