From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755981AbbLHMdZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2015 07:33:25 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:43176 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754814AbbLHMdX (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2015 07:33:23 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 12:34:33 +0000 From: Lorenzo Pieralisi To: fu.wei@linaro.org Cc: tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org, tn@semihalf.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, graeme.gregory@linaro.org, al.stone@linaro.org, hanjun.guo@linaro.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, Marc.Zyngier@arm.com, rruigrok@codeaurora.org, harba@qti.qualcomm.com, jcm@redhat.com, msalter@redhat.com, grant.likely@linaro.org, rrichter@cavium.com, jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com, jon.zhixiong.zhang@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] acpi, apei, arm64: APEI initial support for aarch64. Message-ID: <20151208123433.GB404@red-moon> References: <1449558183-12259-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1449558183-12259-1-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 03:03:03PM +0800, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote: > From: Tomasz Nowicki [...] > +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__) > /* > * Check if firmware advertises firmware first mode. We need FF bit to be set > * along with a set of MC banks which work in FF mode. > */ > static int __init hest_parse_cmc(struct acpi_hest_header *hest_hdr, void *data) > { > - return arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data); > + if (!acpi_disable_cmcff) Why do not you define the flag above in this file (move it out of x86 - that's what I was aiming at in my previous reply) and remove this ifdeffery altogether (First firmware handling could apply to arm64 too according to specs and ACPI on arm64 guidelines) ? arch_apei_enable_cmcff() is a weak function that does nothing on arm64 and if we need to add an implementation we can do it later. Thanks, Lorenzo > + return !arch_apei_enable_cmcff(hest_hdr, data); > + > + return 0; > } > > +static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void) > +{ > + return apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_cmc, NULL); > +} > +#else > +static inline int __init hest_ia_init(void) { return 0; } > +#endif > + > struct ghes_arr { > struct platform_device **ghes_devs; > unsigned int count; > @@ -232,8 +244,9 @@ void __init acpi_hest_init(void) > goto err; > } > > - if (!acpi_disable_cmcff) > - apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_cmc, NULL); > + rc = hest_ia_init(); > + if (rc) > + goto err; > > if (!ghes_disable) { > rc = apei_hest_parse(hest_parse_ghes_count, &ghes_count); > -- > 2.5.0 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >