On 26/04/2015 05:32, Wang, Wei W wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Wei,
On 24/04/2015 20:57, Julien Grall wrote
On 23/04/2016 18:58, Wei Wang wrote:
diff --git a/xen/include/acpi/cpufreq/processor_perf.h
b/xen/include/acpi/cpufreq/processor_perf.h
index d8a1ba6..ebff11d 100644
--- a/xen/include/acpi/cpufreq/processor_perf.h
+++ b/xen/include/acpi/cpufreq/processor_perf.h
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
#define XEN_PX_INIT 0x80000000
+int intel_pstate_init(void);
The intel pstate driver is x86 specific. Although xen/include/acpi contains
common headers for common code.
Thanks for your comments. But I saw "int powernow_cpufreq_init(void);" is put
there.
FWIW, this prototype doesn't have any implementation even on x86.
While currently some drivers (such as the x86 powernow) may define
prototype in the common header. This is wrong, the common code should
not be able to call those functions.
There is an ongoing support on ACPI for ARM (an RFC has been sent a
couple of months ago). Adding new x86 prototype in this directory
complicate the splitting. Please help us to at least avoid adding new
x86 specific prototype/code in the common code when it's possible.
We will take care of moving the current x86 prototype/code in the
arch-specific directories.
Although, I'm not a maintainer. They may have a different opinion on
this point.
Regards,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel