Re: [PATCH] ACPI: processor: Move MWAIT quirk out of acpi_processor.c

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 4:21 PM Wilczynski, Michal
<michal.wilczynski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/29/2023 4:03 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 3:58 PM Wilczynski, Michal
> > <michal.wilczynski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8/29/2023 3:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 3:44 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 05:03:29PM +0300, Michal Wilczynski wrote:
> >>>>> Commit 2a2a64714d9c ("ACPI: Disable MWAIT via DMI on broken Compal board")
> >>>>> introduced a workaround for MWAIT for a specific x86 system.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Move the code outside of acpi_processor.c to acpi/x86/ directory for
> >>>>> consistency and rename the functions associated with it, so their names
> >>>>> start with "acpi_proc_quirk_" to make the goal obvious.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No intentional functional impact.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Except for:
> >>>>
> >>>> ia64-linux-ld: drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.o: in function `acpi_early_processor_control_setup':
> >>>> acpi_processor.c:(.init.text+0x712): undefined reference to `acpi_proc_quirk_mwait_check'
> >>>> ia64-linux-ld: drivers/acpi/processor_pdc.o: in function `acpi_early_processor_set_pdc':
> >>>> processor_pdc.c:(.init.text+0x72): undefined reference to `acpi_proc_quirk_mwait_check'
> >>>>
> >>>> which breaks all ia64 builds.
> >>>>
> >>>> Time to retire that architecture yet ? No one but me seems to even
> >>>> build test it.
> >>> Including 0-day it seems.  This had been in linux-next for several weeks.
> >>>
> >>> Michal, can you have a look at this please?
> >> Hi,
> >> I'll take a look and get back to you with a fix,
> > Actually, if I'm not mistaken, the attached patch should be sufficient.
>
> Exactly, adding this empty stub will make sure there is no linker error, this function
> is relevant only for x86 anyway.
>
> If ia64 support for 0-day was turned off then I think it was rather recently, cause I've
> seen it working I think back in May.
>
> To be honest I'm not sure what is being done in such cases ? Will you send a fix to Linus
> directly, or should I prepare a patch and sent in on the list ??

I'll add a changelog to the fix, post it and merge it directly, so you
don't need to do anything (other than ACKing the fix if you will).