From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hanjun Guo Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] ACPI probing infrastructure Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:03:15 +0800 Message-ID: <55F14753.5070703@linaro.org> References: <1441386412-8139-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <55EEE071.7040506@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55EEE071.7040506@linaro.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Marc Zyngier , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Tomasz Nowicki , Thomas Gleixner , Jason Cooper , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Sudeep Holla , Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas Cc: linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 09/08/2015 09:19 PM, Hanjun Guo wrote: > Hi Marc, > > Sorry for the late response for quite a while... > > On 09/05/2015 01:06 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> IRQ controllers and timers are the two types of device the kernel >> requires before being able to use the device driver model. >> >> ACPI so far lacks a proper probing infrastructure similar to the one >> we have with DT, where we're able to declare IRQ chips and >> clocksources inside the driver code, and let the core code pick it up >> and call us back on a match. This leads to all kind of really ugly >> hacks all over the arm64 code and even in the ACPI layer. >> >> It turns out that providing such a probing infrastructure is rather >> easy, and provides a much deserved cleanup in both the arch code, the >> GIC driver, and the architected timer driver. >> >> I'm sure there is some more code to be deleted, and one can only >> wonder why this wasn't done before the arm64 code was initially merged >> (the diffstat says it all...). >> >> Patches are against v4.2, and a branch is available at >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git >> acpi/device-probing I pulled, and noticed that there is v2, it's cleaner than v1 for the patch 1/5 to me :) > > Great thanks to cleanup these stuff, I will test > this patch set and review it, will get back to you > if I get anything. I tested the v2 and it boots pretty happy as before, if you post to maillist, Tested-by: Hanjun Guo Reviewed-by: Hanjun Guo Thanks Hanjun