From: Alexey Starikovskiy <aystarik@gmail.com>
To: Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@intel.com>
Cc: Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@suse.de>,
LenBrown <lenb@kernel.org>,
"Linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <Linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk" <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: ACPI Cleanup :Initialize EC global lock based on the return status
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 10:24:47 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49114A3F.8080507@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1225847105.26020.100.camel@yakui_zhao.sh.intel.com>
Zhao Yakui wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 17:38 +0800, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>
>> Zhao Yakui wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 16:05 +0800, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>>>
>>>> NAK
>>>>
>>> Will you please describe the detailed reason?
>>>
>>> In the bug 11917 the regression is related with the following commit:
>>> >commit 27663c5855b10af9ec67bc7dfba001426ba21222
>>> >Author: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
>>> >Date: Fri Oct 10 02:22:59 2008 -0400
>>> >ACPI: Change acpi_evaluate_integer to support 64-bit on 32-bit
>>> kernels
>>>
>>> But IMO the main reason is that EC driver misuses the Linux-ACPI
>>> utility interface.(acpi_evaluate_integer).
>>>
>> Did you _read_ the interface specification?
>> It explicitly states that if any function call does not succeed it will not
>> change the data passed to it.
>> So it is again only your not-so-humble opinion.
>>
> What do you mean "not-so-humble"?
Did you ever noticed the difference between IMO and IMHO?
>
>
>>> It will be better to determine whether the return value of ACPI
>>> object is effective according to the return status. In such case the
>>> code still can work well even after the Linux-ACPI utility interface is
>>> changed again.
>>>
>> Code works fine until someone tries to optimize it...
>>
> I agree that your patch can work well. But it depends on the
> internal realization of Linux-ACPI utility interface. If Linux-ACPI
> utility interface is changed, maybe it will be broken. If so, why not to
> determine whether the return value is effective based on the return
> status of Linux-ACPI utility?
>
Once again, my code is based not on internal realization, but on the
ACPI CA spec.
ACPI code is already littered with un-needed checks, transitions, etc;
I see no reason to spread it to whole Linux.
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Alex.
>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-05 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-31 18:42 [PATCH] ACPI: EC: clean up tmp variable before reuse Alexey Starikovskiy
2008-11-03 8:02 ` Zhao Yakui
2008-11-03 8:24 ` [PATCH]: ACPI: Initialize EC global lock based on the return value of _GLK Zhao Yakui
2008-11-04 7:41 ` [PATCH]: ACPI Cleanup :Initialize EC global lock based on the return status Zhao Yakui
2008-11-04 8:05 ` Alexey Starikovskiy
2008-11-04 8:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-11-04 9:21 ` Alexey Starikovskiy
2008-11-04 9:37 ` Zhao Yakui
2008-11-04 9:38 ` Alexey Starikovskiy
2008-11-05 1:05 ` Zhao Yakui
2008-11-05 7:24 ` Alexey Starikovskiy [this message]
2008-12-17 8:55 ` [PATCH] : ACPI : Use RSDT instead of XSDT by adding boot option of "acpi=rsdt" Zhao Yakui
2009-01-09 6:35 ` Len Brown
2009-01-09 10:54 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-01-09 10:59 ` Len Brown
2009-01-09 12:16 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-01-09 12:34 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-01-12 14:13 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-01-12 14:16 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-01-12 22:17 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-01-12 23:38 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-01-09 10:58 ` Blacklist known broken machines to use the rsdt and enabled Cstates on R40e Thomas Renninger
2009-01-09 10:58 ` [PATCH 1/2] Blacklist known broken machines (ThinkPad R40e and R50e) to use rsdt instead xsdt Thomas Renninger
2009-01-09 10:58 ` [PATCH 2/2] R40e using rsdt (previous patch) makes all Cstates work -> remove blacklisting Thomas Renninger
2008-12-30 4:01 ` [PATCH] : ACPI : Add the MWAIT C-state mask to avoid overflow Zhao Yakui
2009-01-04 4:04 ` Zhao Yakui
2009-01-09 6:28 ` Len Brown
2009-01-12 7:07 ` [PATCH] : ACPI : Use clocksource to get the C-state time instead of ACPI PM timer Zhao Yakui
2009-01-12 7:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-12 9:31 ` Zhao Yakui
2009-01-12 12:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-12 9:39 ` Zhao Yakui
2009-01-12 22:09 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2009-01-13 1:26 ` Zhao Yakui
2009-01-13 1:42 ` Zhao Yakui
2009-01-13 3:50 ` [RESEND] " Zhao Yakui
2009-01-20 2:52 ` Len Brown
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=49114A3F.8080507@gmail.com \
--to=aystarik@gmail.com \
--cc=Linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk \
--cc=astarikovskiy@suse.de \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=yakui.zhao@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox