Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753585AbdLMQsw (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:48:52 -0500 Received: from mail-ot0-f193.google.com ([74.125.82.193]:41578 "EHLO mail-ot0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753189AbdLMQsu (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:48:50 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBoukP2dFKY7Mx/n48YKZiskQ0sc5e+8A6O4Ob2goLObDAonpPfTTgEYrniQum+eIfQ/UoDCGiUgF1IkeAMnCCGI= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171213145201.GA6692@localhost.localdomain> References: <1513094360-1414-1-git-send-email-Vadim.Lomovtsev@caviumnetworks.com> <1513094360-1414-2-git-send-email-Vadim.Lomovtsev@caviumnetworks.com> <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E3B74FBD84@ORSMSX110.amr.corp.intel.com> <20171213145201.GA6692@localhost.localdomain> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:48:49 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: xZ6fn5PES6Urw26gB4rpND-lDjw Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: acpica: add acpi status check prior walking through namespace To: Vadim Lomovtsev Cc: "Moore, Robert" , "Wysocki, Rafael J" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "devel@acpica.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "vadim.lomovtsev@cavium.com" , "Schmauss, Erik" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 551 Lines: 13 On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Vadim Lomovtsev wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 09:52:21PM +0000, Moore, Robert wrote: >> Another way to look at this is that the kernel should not be calling ACPI interfaces if ACPI is disabled. > > Yes, I agree. So in this case the ltp_acpi test case has to be updated with such checking > before calling ACPI interfaces. However, it seems that such calls was put there intentionally, > without ACPI state check, as part of kernel testing strategy. Not really. Thanks, Rafael