Hi Rafael,
At 08/25/2017 08:27 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2017 4:06:11 AM CEST Dou Liyang wrote:
[...]
BTW,
1) I found your commit b064a8fa77df (" ACPI / init: Switch over
platform to the ACPI mode later") split the ACPI early initialization
code into acpi_early_init() and acpi_subsystem_init(). Actually enabling
the ACPI subsystem is in acpi_subsystem_init().
2) As we discussed earlier, invoking acpi_put_table() is not good for
this situation.
So I do this patch, Is that goot to you? Any comments will be welcome.
If it is OK, As the patches need to be re-based, and I also found
several spelling mistake, I will send a new version next week.
OK, but does it depend on anything? Or does anything depend on it?
It depends on nothing and can be considered independent.
OK
Please send it as an independent patch, then.
[11/13] patch in this series depends on it. [11/13] patch caused an
ACPI error, we used this patch to fix it.
So the ordering of patches in the series should be different, then.
It should be ordered so as to avoid triggering the warning at all,
so this patch should go before the [11/13].
Yes, Indeed.
It is [12/13] in a series, so it looks like it doesn't depend on the
previous patches in it, but the next one may depend on it? Which is the
case?
The second case(the next one may depend on it) is what I want.
But, seems I made a mistake about the order of the patches. I should
put it before [11/13] to avoid the ACPI error.
Right.
I will adjust the order of the patches in the next version, and post
the whole series to you.
Please just CC it to linux-acpi.
Got it. Will just CC it to linux-acpi, and CC the whole series to you.
Thanks,
dou.
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
