lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] ACPI: let BIOS fall back to legacy handling if PRM disabled
On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 4:02 PM Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/2/21 7:37 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 9:03 AM Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Based on _OSC PRM bit, BIOS can choose switch from legacy handling
> >> to using PRM. So if CONFIG_ACPI_PRMT is disabled, this bit should
> >> not be set to let BIOS fall back to the legacy handling (such as SMI).
> >>
> >> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/acpi/bus.c | 2 ++
> >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> >> index 60fb6a84..30a3d4a 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> >> @@ -303,7 +303,9 @@ static void acpi_bus_osc_negotiate_platform_control(void)
> >>
> >> capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD] |= OSC_SB_HOTPLUG_OST_SUPPORT;
> >> capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD] |= OSC_SB_PCLPI_SUPPORT;
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_PRMT
> >> capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD] |= OSC_SB_PRM_SUPPORT;
> >> +#endif
> >
> > What about using if (IS_ENABLED()) instead of #ifdef?
>
> aha, sorry, using if (IS_ENABLED()) is better, will come up with a new version soon.

No need (see my other reply).

Thanks!

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-02 16:04    [W:0.071 / U:5.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site