On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 06:33:25 PM Joerg Roedel wrote:
> From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@xxxxxxx>
>
> No platform-device is required for IO(x)APICs, so don't even
> create them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@xxxxxxx>
If we do this, I'd prefer not to do [2/3], because we'll introduce code that
will be essentially dead then.
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c | 8 +++++---
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> index b4c1a6a..03250e1 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> @@ -25,9 +25,11 @@
> ACPI_MODULE_NAME("platform");
>
> static const struct acpi_device_id forbidden_id_list[] = {
> - {"PNP0000", 0}, /* PIC */
> - {"PNP0100", 0}, /* Timer */
> - {"PNP0200", 0}, /* AT DMA Controller */
Why do you change the existing entries?
> + {"PNP0000", 0}, /* PIC */
> + {"PNP0100", 0}, /* Timer */
> + {"PNP0200", 0}, /* AT DMA Controller */
> + {"ACPI0009", 0}, /* IOxAPIC */
> + {"ACPI000A", 0}, /* IOAPIC */
> {"", 0},
> };
>
>
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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
