RE: [PATCH 2/2]: acpica/nfit: Rename not-armed bit definition

[Moore, Robert]

I donât have any problem changing this in ACPICA if/when you all agree.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Toshi Kani [mailto:toshi.kani@xxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 4:36 PM
> To: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Cc: Williams, Dan J; Wysocki, Rafael J; Moore, Robert; linux-
> nvdimm@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Linux ACPI; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Elliott,
> Robert (Server Storage)
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]: acpica/nfit: Rename not-armed bit definition
> 
> On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 17:29 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 01:16 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 10:16 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > ACPI 6.0 NFIT Memory Device State Flags in Table 5-129 defines
> > > > > > bit 3 as follows.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   Bit [3] set to 1 to indicate that the Memory Device is
> observed
> > > > > >   to be not armed prior to OSPM hand off. A Memory Device is
> > > > > >   considered armed if it is able to accept persistent writes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This bit is currently defined as ACPI_NFIT_MEM_ARMED, which
> > > > > > can be confusing as if the Memory Device is armed when this bit
> is set.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Change the name to ACPI_NFIT_MEM_NOT_ARMED per the spec.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx>
> > > > > > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  drivers/acpi/nfit.c              |    6 +++---
> > > > > >  drivers/acpi/nfit.h              |    2 +-
> > > > > >  include/acpi/actbl1.h            |    2 +-
> > > > >
> > > > > This file "include/acpi/actbl1.h" is owned by the ACPICA project
> > > > > so any changes need to come through them.  But that said, I'm
> > > > > not sure we need friendly names at this level.
> > > >
> > > > I think the name is misleading, but I agree with the process and
> > > > this
> > > > patch2 can be dropped.  It'd be nice if the ACPICA project can
> > > > pick it up later when they have a chance, though.
> > >
> > > A good way to cause that to happen would be to send a patch to the
> > > ACPICA development list + maintainers as per MAINTAINERS.
> >
> > Oh, I see.  I did run get_maintainer.pl for this patch, but
> > devel@xxxxxxxxxx did not come out in output...  So, I did not realize
> > this email list.
> 
> Sorry, it was listed in the output.  I was simply blinded... :-(
> 
> $ scripts/get_maintainer.pl patches-nd-flags/02*
>  :
> linux-nvdimm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (open list:LIBNVDIMM BLK: MMIO-APERTURE DRIVER)
> linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list:ACPI) linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (open list) devel@xxxxxxxxxx (open list:ACPI COMPONENT ARCHITECTURE
> (ACPICA))
> 
> Thanks!
> -Toshi
N‹§²æ¸›yú²X¬¶ÇvØ–)Þ{.nlj·¥Š{±‘êX§¶›¡Ü}©ž²ÆzÚj:+v‰¨¾«‘êZ+€Êzf£¢·hšˆ§~†­†Ûÿû®w¥¢¸?™¨è&¢)ßf”ùy§m…á«a¶Úÿ0¶ìå