From: Al Stone <ahs3 at redhat.com>
To: devel@acpica.org
Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI: add arch-specific compilation for _OSI and the blacklist
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 22:46:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54D2A139.5030602@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 2903181.4VVp3X75UK@vostro.rjw.lan
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3101 bytes --]
On 02/04/2015 07:03 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 03:00:15 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 03, 2015 05:21:42 PM al.stone(a)linaro.org wrote:
>>> From: Al Stone <al.stone(a)linaro.org>
>>>
>>> Now that all of the _OSI functionality has been separated out, we can
>>> provide arch-specific functionality for it. This also allows us to do
>>> the same for the acpi_blacklisted() function.
>>>
>>> Whether arch-specific functions are used or not now depends on the config
>>> options CONFIG_ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI and CONFIG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_BLACKLIST.
>>> By default, both are set false which causes the x86/ia64 versions to be
>>> used, just as is done today. Setting one or both of these options true
>>> will cause architecture-specific implementations to be built instead; this
>>> patch also provides arm64 implementations.
>>>
>>> For x86/ia64, there is no functional change.
>>>
>>> For arm64, any use of _OSI will issue a warning that it is deprecated.
>>> All use of _OSI will return false -- i.e., it will return no useful
>>> information to any firmware using it. The ability to temporarily turn
>>> on _OSI, or turn off _OSI, or affect it in other ways from the command
>>> line is no longer available for arm64, either. The blacklist for ACPI
>>> on arm64 is empty. This will, of course, require ACPI to be enabled
>>> for arm64.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone(a)linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/Makefile | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist.c | 5 +++++
>>> drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 5 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> index 3e3bd35..4190940 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> @@ -369,6 +369,28 @@ config ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY
>>>
>>> If you are unsure what to do, do not enable this option.
>>>
>>> +config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>>
>> I woulnd't make this and the other one user-selectable. Let architectures
>> select them from their top-level Kconfig files.
>>
>> That's what we do with the other CONFIG_ARCH_ things.
>>
>> So in the architecture-specific Kconfig you'll have
>>
>> config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>> def_bool n
>> depends on ACPI
>>
>> Moreover, I'd call that ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI.
>
> Or even better, you can define them here (drivers/acpi/Kconfig/) as
>
> config ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI
> def_bool n
>
> and then do
>
> select ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI if ACPI
>
> as you did in [4/5].
>
>
Ah, indeed I did. Okay; I'll touch that up.
--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
ahs3(a)redhat.com
-----------------------------------
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Stone <ahs3@redhat.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, al.stone@linaro.org
Cc: fenghua.yu@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, patches@linaro.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
robert.moore@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org,
devel@acpica.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
lenb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI: add arch-specific compilation for _OSI and the blacklist
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 15:46:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54D2A139.5030602@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2903181.4VVp3X75UK@vostro.rjw.lan>
On 02/04/2015 07:03 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 03:00:15 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 03, 2015 05:21:42 PM al.stone@linaro.org wrote:
>>> From: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> Now that all of the _OSI functionality has been separated out, we can
>>> provide arch-specific functionality for it. This also allows us to do
>>> the same for the acpi_blacklisted() function.
>>>
>>> Whether arch-specific functions are used or not now depends on the config
>>> options CONFIG_ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI and CONFIG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_BLACKLIST.
>>> By default, both are set false which causes the x86/ia64 versions to be
>>> used, just as is done today. Setting one or both of these options true
>>> will cause architecture-specific implementations to be built instead; this
>>> patch also provides arm64 implementations.
>>>
>>> For x86/ia64, there is no functional change.
>>>
>>> For arm64, any use of _OSI will issue a warning that it is deprecated.
>>> All use of _OSI will return false -- i.e., it will return no useful
>>> information to any firmware using it. The ability to temporarily turn
>>> on _OSI, or turn off _OSI, or affect it in other ways from the command
>>> line is no longer available for arm64, either. The blacklist for ACPI
>>> on arm64 is empty. This will, of course, require ACPI to be enabled
>>> for arm64.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/Makefile | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist.c | 5 +++++
>>> drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 5 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> index 3e3bd35..4190940 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> @@ -369,6 +369,28 @@ config ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY
>>>
>>> If you are unsure what to do, do not enable this option.
>>>
>>> +config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>>
>> I woulnd't make this and the other one user-selectable. Let architectures
>> select them from their top-level Kconfig files.
>>
>> That's what we do with the other CONFIG_ARCH_ things.
>>
>> So in the architecture-specific Kconfig you'll have
>>
>> config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>> def_bool n
>> depends on ACPI
>>
>> Moreover, I'd call that ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI.
>
> Or even better, you can define them here (drivers/acpi/Kconfig/) as
>
> config ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI
> def_bool n
>
> and then do
>
> select ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI if ACPI
>
> as you did in [4/5].
>
>
Ah, indeed I did. Okay; I'll touch that up.
--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
ahs3@redhat.com
-----------------------------------
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Stone <ahs3@redhat.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, al.stone@linaro.org
Cc: fenghua.yu@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, patches@linaro.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
robert.moore@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org,
devel@acpica.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
lenb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI: add arch-specific compilation for _OSI and the blacklist
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 22:46:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54D2A139.5030602@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2903181.4VVp3X75UK@vostro.rjw.lan>
On 02/04/2015 07:03 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 03:00:15 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 03, 2015 05:21:42 PM al.stone@linaro.org wrote:
>>> From: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> Now that all of the _OSI functionality has been separated out, we can
>>> provide arch-specific functionality for it. This also allows us to do
>>> the same for the acpi_blacklisted() function.
>>>
>>> Whether arch-specific functions are used or not now depends on the config
>>> options CONFIG_ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI and CONFIG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_BLACKLIST.
>>> By default, both are set false which causes the x86/ia64 versions to be
>>> used, just as is done today. Setting one or both of these options true
>>> will cause architecture-specific implementations to be built instead; this
>>> patch also provides arm64 implementations.
>>>
>>> For x86/ia64, there is no functional change.
>>>
>>> For arm64, any use of _OSI will issue a warning that it is deprecated.
>>> All use of _OSI will return false -- i.e., it will return no useful
>>> information to any firmware using it. The ability to temporarily turn
>>> on _OSI, or turn off _OSI, or affect it in other ways from the command
>>> line is no longer available for arm64, either. The blacklist for ACPI
>>> on arm64 is empty. This will, of course, require ACPI to be enabled
>>> for arm64.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/Makefile | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist.c | 5 +++++
>>> drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 5 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> index 3e3bd35..4190940 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> @@ -369,6 +369,28 @@ config ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY
>>>
>>> If you are unsure what to do, do not enable this option.
>>>
>>> +config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>>
>> I woulnd't make this and the other one user-selectable. Let architectures
>> select them from their top-level Kconfig files.
>>
>> That's what we do with the other CONFIG_ARCH_ things.
>>
>> So in the architecture-specific Kconfig you'll have
>>
>> config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>> def_bool n
>> depends on ACPI
>>
>> Moreover, I'd call that ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI.
>
> Or even better, you can define them here (drivers/acpi/Kconfig/) as
>
> config ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI
> def_bool n
>
> and then do
>
> select ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI if ACPI
>
> as you did in [4/5].
>
>
Ah, indeed I did. Okay; I'll touch that up.
--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
ahs3@redhat.com
-----------------------------------
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: ahs3@redhat.com (Al Stone)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI: add arch-specific compilation for _OSI and the blacklist
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 15:46:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54D2A139.5030602@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2903181.4VVp3X75UK@vostro.rjw.lan>
On 02/04/2015 07:03 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 03:00:15 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 03, 2015 05:21:42 PM al.stone at linaro.org wrote:
>>> From: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> Now that all of the _OSI functionality has been separated out, we can
>>> provide arch-specific functionality for it. This also allows us to do
>>> the same for the acpi_blacklisted() function.
>>>
>>> Whether arch-specific functions are used or not now depends on the config
>>> options CONFIG_ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI and CONFIG_ARCH_SPECIFIC_BLACKLIST.
>>> By default, both are set false which causes the x86/ia64 versions to be
>>> used, just as is done today. Setting one or both of these options true
>>> will cause architecture-specific implementations to be built instead; this
>>> patch also provides arm64 implementations.
>>>
>>> For x86/ia64, there is no functional change.
>>>
>>> For arm64, any use of _OSI will issue a warning that it is deprecated.
>>> All use of _OSI will return false -- i.e., it will return no useful
>>> information to any firmware using it. The ability to temporarily turn
>>> on _OSI, or turn off _OSI, or affect it in other ways from the command
>>> line is no longer available for arm64, either. The blacklist for ACPI
>>> on arm64 is empty. This will, of course, require ACPI to be enabled
>>> for arm64.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/Makefile | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/acpi/blacklist.c | 5 +++++
>>> drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 5 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/blacklist-arm.c
>>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/osi-arm.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> index 3e3bd35..4190940 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>>> @@ -369,6 +369,28 @@ config ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY
>>>
>>> If you are unsure what to do, do not enable this option.
>>>
>>> +config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>>
>> I woulnd't make this and the other one user-selectable. Let architectures
>> select them from their top-level Kconfig files.
>>
>> That's what we do with the other CONFIG_ARCH_ things.
>>
>> So in the architecture-specific Kconfig you'll have
>>
>> config ACPI_ARCH_SPECIFIC_OSI
>> def_bool n
>> depends on ACPI
>>
>> Moreover, I'd call that ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI.
>
> Or even better, you can define them here (drivers/acpi/Kconfig/) as
>
> config ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI
> def_bool n
>
> and then do
>
> select ARCH_SPECIFIC_ACPI_OSI if ACPI
>
> as you did in [4/5].
>
>
Ah, indeed I did. Okay; I'll touch that up.
--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
ahs3 at redhat.com
-----------------------------------
next prev reply other threads:[~2015-02-04 22:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-04 0:21 [PATCH v2 0/5] Start deprecating _OSI on new architectures al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone at linaro.org
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] ACPI: move acpi_os_handler() so it can be made arch-dependent later al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone at linaro.org
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone
2015-02-04 13:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 13:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 13:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 22:44 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 22:44 ` [Devel] " Al Stone
2015-02-04 22:44 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 22:44 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 22:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 23:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 23:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 23:49 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 23:49 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 23:49 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] ACPI: move _OSI support functions to allow arch-dependent implementation al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone at linaro.org
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI: add arch-specific compilation for _OSI and the blacklist al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone at linaro.org
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone
2015-02-04 13:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 14:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 14:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 13:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 14:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 14:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 22:46 ` Al Stone [this message]
2015-02-04 22:46 ` [Devel] " Al Stone
2015-02-04 22:46 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 22:46 ` Al Stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] ACPI: arm64: use the arch-specific ACPI _OSI method and ACPI blacklist al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone at linaro.org
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] ACPI: arm64: use "Linux" as ACPI_OS_NAME for _OS on arm64 al.stone
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone at linaro.org
2015-02-04 0:21 ` al.stone
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=54D2A139.5030602@redhat.com \
--to=devel@acpica.org \
/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.