* Baoquan He <bhe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/10/16 at 04:02pm, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Baoquan He <bhe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > ACPI MADT has a 32-bit field providing lapic address at which > > > each processor can access its lapic information. MADT also contains > > > an optional entry to provide a 64-bit address to override the 32-bit > > > one. However the current code does the lapic address override entry > > > parsing twice. One is in early_acpi_boot_init() because AMD NUMA need > > > get boot_cpu_id earlier. The other is in acpi_boot_init() which parses > > > all MADT entries. > > > > > > So in this patch remove the repeated code in the 2nd part. Meanwhile > > > print lapic override entry information like other MADT entry, this > > > will be added to boot log. > > > > it is not at all clear to me from this changelog whether the change is supposed to > > change anything. If not then please spell it out explicitly: > > > > "This patch is not supposed to change any behavior." > > I don't know if adding new information to boot log can be seen as > behavior change. If lapic override entry exist, the code change will > add one line of message to boot log: > > LAPIC_ADDR_OVR (address[0xXXXXXXXX]) > > If this is not behavior change, I will add the sentence you suggested. Yeah, you can write it: "This patch is not supposed to change any runtime behavior, other than improving kernel messages." Thanks, Ingo -- 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
