On 06/23/2015 12:45 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 09:46:06AM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote: [...]+ +static int __init +match_gic_redist(struct acpi_subtable_header *header, const unsigned long end) +{ + return 0; +} +static bool __init acpi_gic_redist_is_present(void) +{ + int count; + + /* scan MADT table to find if we have redistributor entries */ + count = acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_GENERIC_REDISTRIBUTOR, + match_gic_redist, 0); + + /* has at least one GIC redistributor entry */ + if (count > 0) + return true; + else + return false; +}return count > 0; What about systems where the redistributor data is in the GICC subtable ? Do you treat them as GIC V2 :) ? On a side note, having to define an empty function like match_gic_redist is horrible. I wonder whether it is not better to refactor map_madt_entry(), create a MADT subtable iterator out of it and make that code generic, instead of being forced to add these useless MADT handlers just to count entries, it is not the first I noticed.
After digging into the code, it seems that we need more discussion for this comment, you suggested that refactor map_madt_entry() and create a MADT subtable iterator out of it, but we still need a handler to handle each subtable entry, right? then it will become another version of acpi_parse_entries() in drivers/acpi/table.c, and no improvement to code, did I miss something? 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
