On 2014-6-30 18:46, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 04:49:36AM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> index 7de5e3f..33d6dbb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig >> @@ -8,10 +8,10 @@ config ACPI_SCAN_BIOS_NOT_EFI >> menuconfig ACPI >> bool "ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) Support" >> depends on !IA64_HP_SIM >> - depends on IA64 || X86 >> + depends on IA64 || X86 || ARM64 > > I still don't understand what the point of enabling ACPI for arm64 > during this series is. Do you get any working arm64 functionality > (on hardware or model) without subsequent patches? If it's just for > compilation reasons, the best we could do is depending on (ARM64 && > COMPILE_TEST) but even though I would not merge this patch until we have > most of the arm64 required features in place (some of which are > introduced by the upcoming ACPI version). it is ok to me to merge all the patches together, but if Rafael is happy with the clean up patches (patch 1~3) for ACPI core, they can be merged first. > >> depends on PCI >> select PNP >> - default y >> + default y if !ARM64 > > For the benefit of single Image, I think you can default to y here. It ok to me. if we default to y here, devicetree will not be unflattened in default, is it ok to you? you can refer to "[PATCH 12/13] ARM64 / ACPI: if we chose to boot from acpi then disable FDT". 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
