Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:21 AM, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 23:49 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Kani, Toshimitsu > m> wrote: >> > On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 22:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> > >

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:21 AM, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 23:49 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Kani, Toshimitsu > m> wrote: >> > On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 22:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM,

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 23:49 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Kani, Toshimitsu m> wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 22:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Borislav Petkov > > > wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 23:49 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Kani, Toshimitsu m> wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 22:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Borislav Petkov > > > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 22:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Borislav Petkov >> wrote: >> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: >> > >

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 22:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Borislav Petkov >> wrote: >> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: >> > > > > 'data' here is private to the

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 22:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Borislav Petkov > wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > > > > 'data' here is private to the caller.  So, I do not think we > > > > > need to

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 22:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Borislav Petkov > wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > > > > 'data' here is private to the caller.  So, I do not think we > > > > > need to define the bits.  

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: >> > > 'data' here is private to the caller. So, I do not think we need >> > > to define the bits. Shall I change the name to 'driver_data' to >> > > make

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: >> > > 'data' here is private to the caller. So, I do not think we need >> > > to define the bits. Shall I change the name to 'driver_data' to >> > > make it more

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > > 'data' here is private to the caller.  So, I do not think we need > > > to define the bits.  Shall I change the name to 'driver_data' to > > > make it more explicit? > > > > You changed it to 'data'. It was a

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > > 'data' here is private to the caller.  So, I do not think we need > > > to define the bits.  Shall I change the name to 'driver_data' to > > > make it more explicit? > > > > You changed it to 'data'. It was a

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 19:04 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 04:41:38PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > Putting to a single line leads to "line over 80 characters" warning > > from checkpatch.pl.  Would you still advice to do that? > > Yes, the 80 cols rule is not a hard

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 19:04 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 04:41:38PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > Putting to a single line leads to "line over 80 characters" warning > > from checkpatch.pl.  Would you still advice to do that? > > Yes, the 80 cols rule is not a hard

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 04:41:38PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > Putting to a single line leads to "line over 80 characters" warning > from checkpatch.pl. Would you still advice to do that? Yes, the 80 cols rule is not a hard one. Rather, it should be overridden by human good judgement, like

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 04:41:38PM +, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > Putting to a single line leads to "line over 80 characters" warning > from checkpatch.pl. Would you still advice to do that? Yes, the 80 cols rule is not a hard one. Rather, it should be overridden by human good judgement, like

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 13:27 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 01:46:40PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > > ACPI OEM ID / OEM Table ID / Revision can be used to identify > > a platform based on ACPI firmware info.  acpi_blacklisted(), > > intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(),

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 13:27 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 01:46:40PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > > ACPI OEM ID / OEM Table ID / Revision can be used to identify > > a platform based on ACPI firmware info.  acpi_blacklisted(), > > intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(),

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 01:46:40PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: >> ACPI OEM ID / OEM Table ID / Revision can be used to identify >> a platform based on ACPI firmware info. acpi_blacklisted(), >>

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 01:46:40PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: >> ACPI OEM ID / OEM Table ID / Revision can be used to identify >> a platform based on ACPI firmware info. acpi_blacklisted(), >> intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(), and

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 01:46:40PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > ACPI OEM ID / OEM Table ID / Revision can be used to identify > a platform based on ACPI firmware info. acpi_blacklisted(), > intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(), and some other funcs, > have been using similar check to detect a

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 01:46:40PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > ACPI OEM ID / OEM Table ID / Revision can be used to identify > a platform based on ACPI firmware info. acpi_blacklisted(), > intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists(), and some other funcs, > have been using similar check to detect a