On 2014-1-18 11:45, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2014-1-17 20:06, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> On 17/01/14 02:03, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>> Move idle_boot_override out of the arch directory to be a single enum
>>> including both platforms values, this will make it rather easier to
>>> avoid ifdefs around which definitions are for which processor in
>>> generally used ACPI code.
>>>
>>> IDLE_FORCE_MWAIT for IA64 is not used anywhere, so romove it.
>>>
>>> No functional change in this patch.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Alan <gnomes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
[...]
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpu.h b/include/linux/cpu.h
>>> index 03e235ad..e324561 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/cpu.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/cpu.h
>>> @@ -220,6 +220,14 @@ void cpu_idle(void);
>>>
>>> void cpu_idle_poll_ctrl(bool enable);
>>>
>>> +enum idle_boot_override {
>>> + IDLE_NO_OVERRIDE = 0,
>>> + IDLE_HALT,
>>> + IDLE_NOMWAIT,
>>> + IDLE_POLL,
>>> + IDLE_POWERSAVE_OFF
>>> +};
>>> +
>>
>> I do understand the idea behind this change, but IMO HALT and MWAIT are x86
>> specific and may not make sense for other architectures.
>
> yes, this is the strange part, the value is arch-dependent.
>
>>
>> It will also require every architecture using ACPI to export
>> boot_option_idle_override which may not be really required.
>
> so, how about forget this patch and move boot_option_idle_override
> related code into arch directory such as arch/x86/acpi/boot.c for
> x86?
The general idea is that we can move all the arch-dependent codes
in ACPI driver to arch directory, then make codes in drivers/acpi/
arch independent.
Thanks
Hanjun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
