On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:00 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Sorry for being dense. What tree is this against? I can't find mention > > of amdcz in Linus's tree nor linux-next. > As I watched this email send, I noticed the "3/3" in the Subject. ;) I > see the amdcz support now. :P > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/LKML/list/?submitter=18441 > >> diff --git a/include/linux/serial_8250.h b/include/linux/serial_8250.h > >> index a27ef5f56431..02570edaddd8 100644 > >> --- a/include/linux/serial_8250.h > >> +++ b/include/linux/serial_8250.h > >> @@ -136,6 +136,12 @@ struct uart_8250_port { > >> struct uart_8250_em485 *em485; > >> }; > >> > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SERIAL_8250 > >> +extern bool serial8250_skip_old_ports; > >> +#else > >> +static const bool serial8250_skip_old_ports; > >> +#endif > > > > Where does serial8250_skip_old_ports get used where CONFIG_SERIAL_8250 > > isn't defined? (i.e. why is the #ifdef needed here?) > This question still stands, though. From the same patch: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10283641/ if (CONFIG_ACPI_SPCR_TABLE && !CONFIG_SERIAL_8250) in other words, if serial ports are disabled, but we still want to parse the APCI_SPCR_TABLE, which "defaults y if X86". Perhaps that logic should be changed (no need to parse ACPI SPCR table if we are going to disable serial anyway)? > -Kees > -- > Kees Cook > Pixel Security -- 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
