[RFC part1 PATCH 5/7] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce arm_core.c and its related head file
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
Date: 2013-12-03 18:03:06
Also in:
linux-acpi, lkml
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:36:49PM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
introduce arm_core.c and its related head file, after this patch, we can get ACPI tables from BIOS on ARM64 now. Signed-off-by: Al Stone <redacted> Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <redacted> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <redacted> --- arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h | 57 +++++++++++ arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c | 8 ++ drivers/acpi/Makefile | 2 + drivers/acpi/plat/Makefile | 1 + drivers/acpi/plat/arm-core.c | 219 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 5 files changed, 287 insertions(+) create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/plat/Makefile create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/plat/arm-core.cdiff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h index c186f5b..e9444e4 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h@@ -19,6 +19,43 @@ #ifndef _ASM_ARM_ACPI_H #define _ASM_ARM_ACPI_H +#include <asm/cacheflush.h> + +#include <linux/init.h> + +#define COMPILER_DEPENDENT_INT64 long long +#define COMPILER_DEPENDENT_UINT64 unsigned long long
Given we've already pulled in linux/init.h, which has pulled in linux/types.h, is there any reason we can't use s64 and u64 here? If we can, then why don't we unify this further up so each arch doesn't have to define this redundantly?
+ +/* + * Calling conventions: + * + * ACPI_SYSTEM_XFACE - Interfaces to host OS (handlers, threads) + * ACPI_EXTERNAL_XFACE - External ACPI interfaces + * ACPI_INTERNAL_XFACE - Internal ACPI interfaces + * ACPI_INTERNAL_VAR_XFACE - Internal variable-parameter list interfaces + */ +#define ACPI_SYSTEM_XFACE +#define ACPI_EXTERNAL_XFACE +#define ACPI_INTERNAL_XFACE +#define ACPI_INTERNAL_VAR_XFACE + +/* Asm macros */ +#define ACPI_FLUSH_CPU_CACHE() flush_cache_all()
Can you elaborate on when ACPI needs to use this? Thanks, Mark.