public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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.
>>
>>     

  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