Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 05 Feb 2015 18:16:15 +0800 | From | Hanjun Guo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 00/21] Introduce ACPI for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1 |
| |
On 2015年02月05日 04:29, Timur Tabi wrote: > On 02/02/2015 06:45 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This is the v8 of ACPI core patches for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1, there >> are >> some updates since v7: > > All 21 patches: > > Tested-by: Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>
Hi Timur, thank you very much :)
> > I no longer need to use "acpi=force", so that's nice. > >> >> - Add two more documantation to explain why we need ACPI in ARM64 >> servers > > "documentation" > > >> by Grant, and recommendations and prohibitions on the use of the >> numerous >> ACPI tables and objects by Al Stone. >> >> - Add two patches which is need to map acpi tables after >> acpi_gbl_permanent_mmap >> is set >> >> - Add another patch "dt / chosen: Add linux,uefi-stub-generated-dtb >> property" >> to address that if firmware providing no dtb, we can try ACPI >> configuration data >> even if no "acpi=force" is passed in early parameters. (I think >> ACPI for XEN and >> kexec need consider sperately as disscussed, correct me if I'm >> wrong). > > "need to be considered separately", "discussed" > >> >> - Add CC in the patch to the subsystem maintainers and modify the >> subject >> of the patch to explicitly show the subsystem touched by this >> patch set, >> please help us to review and ack them if they make sense, thanks. >> >> - Add Tested-by from Qualcomm and Redhat; >> >> - Make ACPI depends on PCI suggested by Catalin; >> >> - Clean up SMP init function as Lorenzo suggested, remove physical >> CPU hot-plug code in the patch; >> >> - Address some comments from Marc and explicitly state that will >> implment statcked irqdomain and GIC init framework when GICv3 and > > "implement", "stacked"
Sorry for that, I'm not a native English speaker but I'm glad that you you got the meaning of what I said :)
Thank you again for the test.
Hanjun
| |