From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
leif.lindholm@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] acpi/arm64: ignore 5.1 FADTs that are reported as 5.0
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:25:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190620122551.GC4699@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190620094937.GB20872@e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 08:57:32AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Jun 2019, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 02:18:31PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > > Some Qualcomm Snapdragon based laptops built to run Microsoft Windows
> > > > are clearly ACPI 5.1 based, given that that is the first ACPI revision
> > > > that supports ARM, and introduced the FADT 'arm_boot_flags' field,
> > > > which has a non-zero field on those systems.
> > > >
> > > > So in these cases, infer from the ARM boot flags that the FADT must be
> > > > 5.1 or later, and treat it as 5.1.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Makes sense and looks simple to me.
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> >
> > Could we pleeeeease have this in for v5.3?
> >
> > We have available, consumer-level platforms that rely on this change.
>
> But we do not have the kernel infrastructure to support them so
> I am fine with it but urgency is questionable as far as I am
> concerned.
Yes we do. At least, we will in v5.3.
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
leif.lindholm@linaro.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] acpi/arm64: ignore 5.1 FADTs that are reported as 5.0
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:25:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190620122551.GC4699@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190620094937.GB20872@e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 08:57:32AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Jun 2019, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 02:18:31PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > > Some Qualcomm Snapdragon based laptops built to run Microsoft Windows
> > > > are clearly ACPI 5.1 based, given that that is the first ACPI revision
> > > > that supports ARM, and introduced the FADT 'arm_boot_flags' field,
> > > > which has a non-zero field on those systems.
> > > >
> > > > So in these cases, infer from the ARM boot flags that the FADT must be
> > > > 5.1 or later, and treat it as 5.1.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Makes sense and looks simple to me.
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> >
> > Could we pleeeeease have this in for v5.3?
> >
> > We have available, consumer-level platforms that rely on this change.
>
> But we do not have the kernel infrastructure to support them so
> I am fine with it but urgency is questionable as far as I am
> concerned.
Yes we do. At least, we will in v5.3.
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-20 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-19 12:18 [RFC PATCH] acpi/arm64: ignore 5.1 FADTs that are reported as 5.0 Ard Biesheuvel
2019-06-19 12:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-06-19 12:24 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-06-19 12:24 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-06-20 7:57 ` Lee Jones
2019-06-20 7:57 ` Lee Jones
2019-06-20 9:49 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-06-20 9:49 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-06-20 12:25 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2019-06-20 12:25 ` Lee Jones
2019-06-19 12:26 ` Lee Jones
2019-06-19 12:26 ` Lee Jones
2019-06-20 7:53 ` Graeme Gregory
2019-06-20 7:53 ` Graeme Gregory
2019-06-20 9:43 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-06-20 9:43 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-06-24 6:39 ` Hanjun Guo
2019-06-24 6:39 ` Hanjun Guo
2019-06-24 14:55 ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-24 14:55 ` Catalin Marinas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190620122551.GC4699@dell \
--to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=leif.lindholm@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.