On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 3/22/23 11:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > or please let me know if you want me to pick this up (in which case it
> > will require an ACK from one of the x86 maintainers).
>
> I'll pull it into x86/acpi. I'm kinda shocked the compiler is so
> clueless, but this makes the C code more readable anyway. Win/win, I guess.
Please note that the return form __acpi_{acquire,release}_global_lock
is actually used as bool:
acenv.h:
int __acpi_acquire_global_lock(unsigned int *lock);
int __acpi_release_global_lock(unsigned int *lock);
#define ACPI_ACQUIRE_GLOBAL_LOCK(facs, Acq) \
((Acq) = __acpi_acquire_global_lock(&facs->global_lock))
#define ACPI_RELEASE_GLOBAL_LOCK(facs, Acq) \
((Acq) = __acpi_release_global_lock(&facs->global_lock))
evglock.c:
acpi_status acpi_ev_acquire_global_lock(u16 timeout)
{
...
u8 acquired = FALSE;
...
ACPI_ACQUIRE_GLOBAL_LOCK(acpi_gbl_FACS, acquired);
if (acquired) ...
}
acpi_status acpi_ev_release_global_lock(void)
{
u8 pending = FALSE;
...
ACPI_RELEASE_GLOBAL_LOCK(acpi_gbl_FACS, pending);
if (pending) ...
}
These functions are also defined for ia64, so I didn't want to change
the return value. But ia64 is going to be retired, and this opens the
optimization opportunity.
Uros.
