From: Al Stone <astone@redhat.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Steve Capper <steve.capper@linaro.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / ARM64: Remove EXPERT dependency for ACPI on ARM64
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 13:35:06 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56FC2A6A.1050404@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1459360718-24125-1-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org>
On 03/30/2016 11:58 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> When ACPI was originally merged for arm64 it had only been tested on
> emulators and not on real physical platforms and no platforms were
> relying on it. This meant that there were concerns that there might be
> serious issues attempting to use it on practical systems so it had a
> dependency on EXPERT added to warn people that it was in an early stage
> of development with very little practical testing. Since then things
> have moved on a bit. We have seen people testing on real hardware and
> now have people starting to produce some platforms (the most prominent
> being the 96boards Cello) which only have ACPI support and which build
> and run to some useful extent with mainline.
>
> This is not to say that ACPI support or support for these systems is
> completely done, there are still areas being worked on such as PCI, but
> at this point it seems that we can be reasonably sure that ACPI will be
> viable for use on ARM64 and that the already merged support works for
> the cases it handles. For the AMD Seattle based platforms support
> outside of PCI has been fairly complete in mainline a few releases now.
>
> This is also not to say that we don't have vendors working with ACPI who
> are trying do things that we would not consider optimal but it does not
> appear that the EXPERT dependency is having a substantial impact on
> these vendors.
>
> Given all this it seems that at this point the EXPERT dependency mainly
> creates inconvenience for users with systems that are doing the right
> thing and gets in the way of including the ACPI code in the testing that
> people are doing on mainline. Removing it should help our ongoing
> testing cover those platforms with only ACPI support and help ensure
> that when ACPI code is merged any problems it causes for other users are
> more easily discovered.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> index 82b96ee8624c..bf5dc1ac3446 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
> menuconfig ACPI
> bool "ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) Support"
> depends on !IA64_HP_SIM
> - depends on IA64 || X86 || (ARM64 && EXPERT)
> + depends on IA64 || X86 || ARM64
> depends on PCI
> select PNP
> default y
>
Yes, please.
Reviewed-by: Al Stone <ahs3@redhat.com>
Thanks.
--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
ahs3@redhat.com
-----------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-30 19:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-30 17:58 [PATCH] ACPI / ARM64: Remove EXPERT dependency for ACPI on ARM64 Mark Brown
2016-03-30 18:02 ` G Gregory
2016-03-30 19:25 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-03-30 19:35 ` Al Stone [this message]
2016-03-31 3:44 ` Hanjun Guo
2016-03-31 12:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-03-31 12:36 ` Will Deacon
2016-03-31 12:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-03-31 13:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-03-31 13:38 ` Will Deacon
2016-03-31 14:48 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-03-31 16:39 ` Mark Brown
2016-03-31 15:28 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-12 17:23 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-04-13 5:25 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-13 8:51 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-04-13 12:49 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-14 18:02 ` Olof Johansson
2016-04-14 18:25 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-14 18:49 ` Olof Johansson
2016-04-14 18:56 ` Mark 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=56FC2A6A.1050404@redhat.com \
--to=astone@redhat.com \
--cc=ahs3@redhat.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=graeme.gregory@linaro.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=steve.capper@linaro.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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