On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:10:02 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2015/3/17 11:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 10:36:47 AM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >> On 2015/3/17 10:28, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 09:08:45 AM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >>>> On 2015/3/17 7:15, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>>>> On Monday, March 16, 2015 08:14:52 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >>>>>> On 2015年03月14日 05:49, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Friday, March 13, 2015 04:14:29 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/ia64/Kconfig b/arch/ia64/Kconfig
> >>>>>>>> index 074e52b..e8728d7 100644
> >>>>>>>> --- a/arch/ia64/Kconfig
> >>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/ia64/Kconfig
> >>>>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ config IA64
> >>>>>>>> select ARCH_MIGHT_HAVE_PC_SERIO
> >>>>>>>> select PCI if (!IA64_HP_SIM)
> >>>>>>>> select ACPI if (!IA64_HP_SIM)
> >>>>>>>> + select ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP if ACPI
> >>>>>>>> select ARCH_MIGHT_HAVE_ACPI_PDC if ACPI
> >>>>>>>> select HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK
> >>>>>>>> select HAVE_IDE
> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> >>>>>>>> index b7d31ca..9804431 100644
> >>>>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> >>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> >>>>>>>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ config X86_64
> >>>>>>>> ### Arch settings
> >>>>>>>> config X86
> >>>>>>>> def_bool y
> >>>>>>>> + select ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP if ACPI
> >>>>>>> One more nit. If you did
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> + select ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP if ACPI_SLEEP
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> here (and above for ia64), you'd avoid having to make ACPI_SLEEP
> >>>>>>> depend on ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP which goes somewhat backwards.
> >>>>>> In sleep.c,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
> >>>>>> acpi_target_system_state()
> >>>>>> {
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>> #endif
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> and CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP depends on SUSPEND || HIBERNATION,
> >>>>>> which one of them will be enabled on ARM64 so ACPI_SLEEP
> >>>>>> will also enabled too.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So if we
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +select ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP if ACPI_SLEEP
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +acpi-$(CONFIG_ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP) += sleep.o
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> it will lead to errors for acpi_target_system_state() that
> >>>>>> is declared but not defined, so I will keep the code as
> >>>>>> it is, what do you think?
> >>>>> No, we need to hash this out. Having two different Kconfig options meaning
> >>>>> almost the same thing (ACPI_SLEEP and ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP) is beyond ugly.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do you need ACPI_SLEEP on ARM64 at all?
> >>>> No, at least for now we don't need it, the spec for sleep is not ready for
> >>>> ARM64 arch, so ACPI_SLEEP will not work at all on ARM64.
> >>> Well, so what about selecting ACPI_SLEEP from the architectures that use it?
> >> Do you mean remove CONFIG_ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP and
> >>
> >> +acpi-$(CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP) += sleep.o
> >>
> >> as well (also need to remove duplicate #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP in sleep.c if
> >> we doing so)?
> > Well, almost. There is one problem with that, becuase sleep.c contains code
> > outside of the ACPI_SLEEP-dependent blocks. That code is used for powering
> > off ACPI platforms.
> >
> > I guess you don't want that code on ARM too, right?
>
> Yes, you are right.
>
> >
> > Perhaps we can use ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY for that? ARM64 will be the
>
> Sorry, I can't fully understand your intention here, could you please
> explain it more?
>
> Let me guess a little bit. Do you mean use ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY for
> powering off ACPI platforms? if so, I guess it's not a good idea, ACPI spec
> only says that S4BIOS is not supported on HW-reduced ACPI platforms, S5
> has no such limitation, if I miss something here, please let me know.
OK, so in your current patch, please replace ACPI_GENERIC_SLEEP with
ACPI_SYSTEM_POWER_STATES_SUPPORT and all should be clear.
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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
