Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm/arm64: ACPI: Introduce CONFIG_ACPI_MUST_HAVE_CCA
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi
Date: Thu Apr 30 2015 - 11:02:06 EST
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 02:50:18PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 02:47:13PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> > On 2015???04???29??? 22:42, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 09:31:03AM -0500, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> > >> On 04/29/2015 09:04 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 08:44:08AM -0500, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> > >>> Any plans for ACPI on 32-bit ARM?
> > >>
> > >> Not that I am aware, but I could be totally wrong. The reason I am adding
> > >> this here for 32-bit ARM is because the ACPI spec mentioned this.
> > >>
> > >> If you think this is not necessary until we introduce ACPI for ARM32, it can
> > >> be removed.
> > >
> > > I think it should be removed (as long as ACPI cannot be selected on
> > > arm32).
> > I agree.
> > Now there is no plan for ARM32 ACPI as I know, ACPI for ARM targets
> > for ARM64 based enterprise system at now.
> While we're at it, do we *really* need to support CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS_POWER
> on arm64? It's a deprecated /proc/acpi interface and it would be nice to
> avoid introducing deprecated behaviour if we can avoid it.
I think we can make it depend on x86 because the compilation units that
create that proc dirs (ACPI_BATTERY and ACPI_AC) already depend on it,
at the moment compiling drivers/acpi/cm_sbs.c is totally useless on
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/