[PATCH v8 00/21] Introduce ACPI for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1

Hanjun Guo
2015-02-05T10:16:15Z

On 2015?02?05? 04:29, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On 02/02/2015 06:45 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is the v8 of ACPI core patches for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1, there
>> are
>> some updates since v7:
>
> All 21 patches:
>
> Tested-by: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>

Hi Timur, thank you very much :)

>
> I no longer need to use "acpi=force", so that's nice.
>
>>
>> - Add two more documantation to explain why we need ACPI in ARM64
>> servers
>
> "documentation"
>
>
>> by Grant, and recommendations and prohibitions on the use of the
>> numerous
>> ACPI tables and objects by Al Stone.
>>
>> - Add two patches which is need to map acpi tables after
>> acpi_gbl_permanent_mmap
>> is set
>>
>> - Add another patch "dt / chosen: Add linux,uefi-stub-generated-dtb
>> property"
>> to address that if firmware providing no dtb, we can try ACPI
>> configuration data
>> even if no "acpi=force" is passed in early parameters. (I think
>> ACPI for XEN and
>> kexec need consider sperately as disscussed, correct me if I'm
>> wrong).
>
> "need to be considered separately", "discussed"
>
>>
>> - Add CC in the patch to the subsystem maintainers and modify the
>> subject
>> of the patch to explicitly show the subsystem touched by this
>> patch set,
>> please help us to review and ack them if they make sense, thanks.
>>
>> - Add Tested-by from Qualcomm and Redhat;
>>
>> - Make ACPI depends on PCI suggested by Catalin;
>>
>> - Clean up SMP init function as Lorenzo suggested, remove physical
>> CPU hot-plug code in the patch;
>>
>> - Address some comments from Marc and explicitly state that will
>> implment statcked irqdomain and GIC init framework when GICv3 and
>
> "implement", "stacked"

Sorry for that, I'm not a native English speaker but I'm glad that you
you got the meaning of what I said :)

Thank you again for the test.

Hanjun