From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hanjun Guo Subject: Re: [Linaro-acpi] [PATCH v3 part1 06/11] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce lowlevel suspend function Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:46:33 +0800 Message-ID: <535F66E9.3030307@linaro.org> References: <1398432017-8506-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <1398432017-8506-7-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <20140428152240.GD31782@e102568-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.220.53]:60898 "EHLO mail-pa0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751675AbaD2Iq4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 04:46:56 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id ld10so6811656pab.12 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 01:46:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140428152240.GD31782@e102568-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , Rob Herring , Arnd Bergmann , Mark Brown , Catalin Marinas , "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Will Deacon , Olof Johansson Hi Lorenzo, On 2014-4-28 23:22, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 02:20:12PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> acpi_wakeup_address is used on x86 as the address bios jumps into >> when machine wakes up from suspend. As arm64 does not have such a >> bios this mechanism will be provided by other means. But the define >> is still required inside the acpi core. >> [...] >> #define cpu_physical_id(cpu) -1 >> >> +/* Low-level suspend routine. */ >> +extern int (*acpi_suspend_lowlevel)(void); >> +#define acpi_wakeup_address (0) > > I understand you want code to compile, but as I mentioned in another > thread, I would focus more on understanding if these macros/hooks are > really needed for ARM rather than defining them _just_ to make code > compile. The fact that you are forced to define them makes me think > there is something to be changed in ACPI core code instead of adding > empty and probably useless macros/hooks for ARM which I have no idea > whatsoever whether will ever be needed or not. Ok, we will deep into ACPI core to find out how to handle it, thanks for your suggestion. Hanjun