On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:34:41AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Hello Mark, > > > > do you think that this patch addresses your previous comments > > (http://marc.info/?l=devicetree&m=145926913008544&w=2) appropriately? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Stefano > > > > On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, Shannon Zhao wrote: > > > From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > When it's a Xen domain0 booting with ACPI, it will supply a /chosen and > > > a /hypervisor node in DT. So check if it needs to enable ACPI. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Acked-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c | 14 ++++++++++---- > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c > > > index d1ce8e2..57ee317 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c > > > @@ -67,10 +67,15 @@ static int __init dt_scan_depth1_nodes(unsigned long node, > > > { > > > /* > > > * Return 1 as soon as we encounter a node at depth 1 that is > > > - * not the /chosen node. > > > + * not the /chosen node, or /hypervisor node with compatible > > > + * string "xen,xen". > > > */ > > > - if (depth == 1 && (strcmp(uname, "chosen") != 0)) > > > - return 1; > > > + if (depth == 1 && (strcmp(uname, "chosen") != 0)) { > > > + if (strcmp(uname, "hypervisor") != 0 || > > > + !of_flat_dt_is_compatible(node, "xen,xen")) > > > + return 1; > > > + } > > > + > > > return 0; > > > } > > Is the duplicate node checking logic I mentioned in that review gone? > i.e. do we not need an is_xen_node() helper? Given the simplicity of just calling of_flat_dt_is_compatible(node, "xen,xen"), I think we can do without the helper. Also the function in the previous patch also checks for the Xen version which is not needed here. > Additionally, IMO, this would be easier to follow without the nested > conditionals, e.g. > > static int __init dt_scan_depth1_nodes(unsigned long node, > const char *uname, int depth, > void *data) > { > /* > * Ignore anything not directly under the root node; we'll > * catch its parent instead. > */ > if (depth != 1) > return 0; > > if (strcmp(uname, "chosen") == 0) > return 0; > > if (strcmp(uname, "hypervisor") == 0 && > of_flat_dt_is_compatible(node, "xen,xen")) > return 0; > > /* > * This node at depth 1 is neither a chosen node nor a xen node, > * which we do not expect. > */ > return 1; > } > > Otherwise, this looks fine to me. FWIW, either way: > > Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> That is easier to read. For simplicity, I'll submit a patch with you as author, on top of the existing, to make this change. I'll use your Signed-off-by, if that's OK. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
