On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 06:42:16PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 6:00 PM Sudeep Holla [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 04:40:29AM +0800, Miao Wang wrote:

quoted

quoted

2024年8月8日 17:43，Hanjun Guo [off-list ref] 写道：

On 2024/8/8 17:00, Miao Wang via B4 Relay wrote:

quoted

From: Miao Wang <redacted>
To avoid arch-specific code in general ACPI initialization flow,
we introduce a weak symbol acpi_arch_init. Currently, arm64 can
utillize this to insert its specific flow. In the future,
other architectures can also have chance to define their own
arch-specific acpi initialization process if necessary.
Signed-off-by: Miao Wang <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <redacted>
---
Changes from v1
- Change acpi_arch_init from a static inline stub to a weak function
  according to Haijun Guo's advice
---
Changes from v2:
- Add __init attribute to the weak acpi_arch_init stub
- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240807-intro-acpi-arch-init-v2-1-9231e23a7721@gmail.com (local)

Thanks for the quick update,

Acked-by: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>

Hi, all. I wonder whether this patch is good to be applied or
any improvement is needed.

LGTM. Rafael, do you want to take this via your tree or arm64(need your ack)
once you are happy with the change ?

Actually, I'd prefer the RISCV ACPI changes to land first:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20240812005929.113499-1-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com/ (local)

and then it can be consolidated to use acpi_arch_init() in both places.

I'm going to move the RISCV material to linux-next on Monday, but I'd
prefer to defer the consolidation to the 6.13 cycle (after 6.12-rc1 is
out).

Makes sense, thanks!

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep