Hi Manish,
The usual scripts/get_maintainers.pl.
On 02/01/18 09:28, manish.ja...@linaro.org wrote:
From: Manish Jaggi <manish.ja...@linaro.org>
Add ACPI_IORT config
Singed-off-by: Manish Jaggi <manish.ja...@linaro.org>
---
xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 5 +++++
xen/drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 3 +++
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
index f58019d6ed..d4767d6ea3 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -42,6 +42,11 @@ config ACPI
Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) support for Xen is
an alternative to device tree on ARM64.
+config ACPI_IORT
+ bool
+ prompt "ACPI IORT Support" if EXPERT = "y"
No need for EXPERT here. It will get picked up by ACPI.
Also, I don't think it is useful to let the user disabling IORT. You
either need all ACPI or not. It will get into trouble if IORT is not
handled in Xen.
Note that I am happy to see the config ACPI_IORT here. But not exposed
to user's choice.
+ depends on ACPI
+
config HAS_GICV3
bool
diff --git a/xen/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/xen/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
index b64d3731fb..15ae98140c 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
+++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
@@ -5,5 +5,8 @@ config ACPI
config ACPI_LEGACY_TABLES_LOOKUP
bool
+config ACPI_IORT
+ bool
I am not sure to understand why you define ACPI_IORT again here. It is
already done above?
However, I don't think it is necessary to have a separate patch just for
adding the Kconfig. You can fold into the patch that is first using it.
BTW, I would have expected this to be patch #1 and used to gate
compilation for any of those file.
+
config NUMA
bool
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
