RE: [PATCH 2/4] ACPICA: Introduce new acpi_os_physical_table_add OS callback

[Zheng, Lv]

Hi, Thomas

> From: Thomas Renninger [mailto:trenn@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 7:55 PM
> 
> On Tuesday, March 04, 2014 12:31:57 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> > Hi,  Thomas
> >
> > > From: Thomas Renninger [mailto:trenn@xxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 8:42 PM
> > >
> > > Hi Lv,
> > >
> > > On Monday, March 03, 2014 01:20:31 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> > > > Hi, Thomas
> > > >
> > > > I have a patch series that can cleanup the ACPICA table manager, and
> > > > change
> > >
> > > > the acpi_load_table into the following style:
> > > Ok. I suggest that:
> > > 1) If Thomas (Gleixner) or whoever wants to try out or needs it urgently,
> > > he>
> > >    can (must) use a recent kernel with my patches applied.
> > >
> > > 2) You continue to get your changes into ACPICA.
> > >
> > >    Eventually or best would be if you add whatever is needed to
> > >    allow adding of tables as well (which will be there automatically if
> > >    I understood the description of your changes correctly).
> > >
> > > 3) Either you give it a try yourself or give me short description for
> > >
> > >    what I have to look out for and I can re-post the Linux patches
> > >    based on your ACPICA changes, once they show up in the Linux kernel.
> > >    Best give me a ping as soon as I should look at it.
> >
> > That sounds good.
> >
> > Or it can be more efficient for productions:
> > Linux can merge your patches and ACPICA just stop to take them.
> You mean add my stuff to drivers/acpi/acpica in Linux kernel without
> pushing them into the ACPICA repository?
> 
> I cannot remember that this ever happened (beside small important fixes)
> and I doubt Rafael is willing to do that.
> If it would be super critical, but I cannot see that it is.

OK.

> > This will leave us divergences.
> Yes, that would be bad.

Yes.

> > After the table manager cleanups are tested and shipped in the ACPICA repo,
> > the new facilities will automatically be rolled into Linux branches.
> I'd suggest to just wait for that.
> Best already try to integrate the ACPI table override/add part as you think
> it should work without additional changes in drivers/acpi/acpica.
> 
> If this happened and things are submitted to get integrated into the Linux
> kernel, please add me to CC or point me to the patchset.

Fortunately, there is a kernel bugzilla entry requires this series.
I've posted it on the kernel bugzilla.
Here is the patchset:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69711
You need to apply 9 patches:
attachment 128061 - attachment 128141
The last patch has introduced an early boot API:
acpi_install_table.
This can be used to enhance this series.

> > Then I
> > can help to reduce the divergences using the new ACPICA facilities. At that
> > time I may ask whoever that can test to offer help to review the cleanup
> > patch.
> 
> I can then give your new patcheset some testing and try to get the Linux
> (drivers/acpi/osl.c) parts (re-)implemented based on your stuff.
> There might still be the one or other minor fix needed that has to go
> into acpica as well, but that should not be that hard to manage and
> might end up in acpica and Linux kernel in parallel without much
> extra overhead.

If you found any issues in using this series, let me know.

Thanks and best regards
-Lv

> 
>      Thomas
--
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/