On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 4:01 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 02:50:08PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 11:01 AM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > FFH(Fixed Function Hardware) Opregion is approved to be added in ACPIC 6.5 via > > > > s/ACPIC/ACPI/ > > > > Fixed and pushed in ACPICA PR. > > > > code first approach[1]. It requires special context data similar to GPIO and > > > Generic Serial Bus as it needs to know platform specific offset and length. > > > > > > Add support for the special context data needed by FFH Opregion. > > > > > > FFH OpRegion enables advanced use of FFH on some architectures. For example, > > > it could be used to easily proxy AML code to architecture-specific behavior > > > (to ensure it is OS initiated) > > > > > > Actual behavior of FFH is ofcourse architecture specific and depends on > > > the FFH bindings. The offset and length could have arch specific meaning > > > or usage. > > > > > > [1] https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3598 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> > > > > This looks reasonable to me and I see that you've already submitted a > > pull request to the upstream ACPICA. > > I assume you would prefer me to post the other 2 patches once this lands > in your -next. That would be ideal, but technically I can apply an ACPICA patch in advance once the corresponding pull request has been integrated upstream. > Worst case I would like to get the generic patch in along > with ACPICA changes, I can then route the arm64 specific next cycle if it > gets too late for v5.20 Let's try the normal flow and worry about workarounds if it gets late.
