On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 4:43 PM, Andy Shevchenko > <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 5:02 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Andy Shevchenko >>> <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Instead of declaring function as __weak, establish a new struct for >> ACPI related stubs and incorporate it into x86_init. >> >> That is my proposal. I think I would go this way in my case where I >> need to treat differently ACPI HW reduced initialization of legacy >> devices. > > IOW you'd like to have a set of ACPI init callbacks that could be > defined by an arch, right? Correct! And since there is another potential user (Xen) for this approach I consider it a good chance to be chosen. Though I have no idea if Xen can do things differently. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko -- 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
