From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] acpi, spcr: Make SPCR avialable to other architectures Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 08:08:08 -0600 Message-ID: <6541a055-bfd4-daa7-5b91-38384bd65c3f@codeaurora.org> References: <20171211155059.17062-1-prarit@redhat.com> <20171211155059.17062-2-prarit@redhat.com> <20171213124533.GA32362@red-moon> <20171214103027.GB697@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20171214103027.GB697@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: Prarit Bhargava , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Bhupesh Sharma , Lv Zheng , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , graeme.gregory@linaro.org, mark.salter@redhat.com List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 12/14/17 4:30 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: >> I didn't want to put any ACPI code in amba-pl011.c, so putting it in spcr.c >> made the most sense. I agree the global variable is ugly. If you have a >> better idea, I'm all ears. > I told you my idea. It could have been made easier by reusing the > ACPI_DECLARE_PROBE_ENTRY() mechanism. Sorry, I don't mean to be difficult, but when did you tell *me* this idea of yours? I don't see any email from you to me that mentions ACPI_DECLARE_PROBE_ENTRY(). I've never even heard of that macro before. Please note that I'm not the original author of this code. -- Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.