From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-x242.google.com (mail-pf0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3s2lV25l0zzDqQD for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:40:42 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pf0-x242.google.com with SMTP id g202so9501013pfb.1 for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2016 20:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:40:31 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin To: Andrey Smirnov Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Scott Wood , Alessio Igor Bogani , Paul Mackerras , Daniel Axtens Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] powerpc: Factor out common code in setup-common.c Message-ID: <20160801134031.7dcb7c82@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1469747238-17432-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> References: <1469747238-17432-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 16:07:16 -0700 Andrey Smirnov wrote: > Factor out a small bit of common code in machine_restart(), > machine_power_off() and machine_halt(). > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Smirnov > --- > > No changes compared to v1. > > arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c | 23 ++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c > b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c index 714b4ba..5cd3283 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c > @@ -130,15 +130,22 @@ void machine_shutdown(void) > ppc_md.machine_shutdown(); > } > > +static void machine_hang(void) > +{ > + pr_emerg("System Halted, OK to turn off power\n"); > + local_irq_disable(); > + while (1) > + ; > +} What's the intended semantics of this function? A default power off handler when the platform supplies none? Would ppc_power_off() be a good name? Should the smp_send_stop() call be moved here? It seems like a reasonable cleanup though. Thanks, Nick