From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CED63FC2; Sat, 28 Jun 2025 07:42:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.187 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751096528; cv=none; b=EMsABkmTk9ycBjeSGPcqVobZeD0rxgv4nTOsUlCGjeeR42KHd84GzW9YWLriHUNW0EwZS/+4hBI+XIzdQZ0L+EEpE4Yw5QIjrisxWA7O5ev6eOGJ/zIVDJC+igewTOnWQCf16yvOfgoKa6TbL4nMF4I+vXnM1+Iz5IdE6PeeHNA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751096528; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QZI4f0Jg7b0IvKOoiNsofEQtiG+a1gOaMn0v3Y3FbEQ=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=f+CEnzmSe48bKgQTt1L4QED1sR1GBGBCVJSz/xM8t89QW1iOyLXsqyiPTt91eS5oaFOhsucaH7jyugWh9g0BQ4yc0MXcwb/5vmDnKldOhYOW53ibGBFRAJ7dahW1AqgyOSGHrU4QRYMKA5khpYs6Q4EY7i62rqsyOkNVs30wOXQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.187 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.254]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4bTklm3rKCz10XKK; Sat, 28 Jun 2025 15:37:24 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemf500002.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.57]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30664180492; Sat, 28 Jun 2025 15:42:03 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.178.247] (10.174.178.247) by dggpemf500002.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.57) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Sat, 28 Jun 2025 15:42:02 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] ACPI: Improve SPCR handling and messaging on SPCR-less systems To: Li Chen , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , Liu Wei , Ryan Roberts , Andrew Morton , Jonathan Cameron , Sudeep Holla , , , References: <20250620131309.126555-1-me@linux.beauty> From: Hanjun Guo Message-ID: <67983ddc-b8f8-43b5-209f-ca77c91fe56b@huawei.com> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 15:42:01 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20250620131309.126555-1-me@linux.beauty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.17) To dggpemf500002.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.57) On 2025/6/20 21:13, Li Chen wrote: > From: Li Chen > This small series improves the kernel behavior and output when the ACPI SPCR > table is not present or not supported. > > Currently, even on systems that completely lack an SPCR table, the kernel prints: > "Use ACPI SPCR as default console: Yes" > > This may mislead users into thinking an SPCR table exists > when in fact there is no such table at all. This series addresses this in two steps: > > Patch 1 ensures that acpi_parse_spcr() returns -ENODEV if CONFIG_ACPI_SPCR_TABLE is disabled. > > Patch 2 updates arm64 acpi_boot_table_init() to only print the Yes > if acpi_parse_spcr() succeeds. > > This results in cleaner and more accurate boot logs on ARM64. > > Tested on both SPCR-enabled and SPCR-less qemu-system arm64 virt platform. [1] > > Changelog: > v2: refine the printk message logic as suggested by Hanjun Guo. [2] > > [1]: https://patchew.org/QEMU/20250528105404.457729-1-me@linux.beauty/ > [2]: https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg5730585.html > > Li Chen (2): > ACPI: Return -ENODEV from acpi_parse_spcr() when SPCR support is > disabled > ACPI: Suppress misleading SPCR console message when SPCR table is > absent > > arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c | 10 +++++++--- > include/linux/acpi.h | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) This version looks good to me, Acked-by: Hanjun Guo Thanks Hanjun