Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 17:05:18 +0100
From:   Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
To:     Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
        Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 05/21] ACPI: Kconfig: Enable ACPI_PROCESSOR for RISC-V
Message-ID: <20230220160518.zuppmgvvhvipawxe@orel>
References: <20230216182043.1946553-1-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
 <20230216182043.1946553-6-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230216182043.1946553-6-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 11:50:27PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> Enable the ACPI processor driver for RISC-V.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> index ccbeab9500ec..b44ac8e55b54 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
> @@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ config ACPI_CPPC_LIB
>  
>  config ACPI_PROCESSOR
>  	tristate "Processor"
> -	depends on X86 || IA64 || ARM64 || LOONGARCH
> +	depends on X86 || IA64 || ARM64 || LOONGARCH || RISCV
>  	select ACPI_PROCESSOR_IDLE
>  	select ACPI_CPU_FREQ_PSS if X86 || IA64 || LOONGARCH
>  	select THERMAL
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>

The commit message doesn't tell me if this is a premature config
enablement or if it's already necessary for this series. I think
if it's already necessary, then it should point out what requires
it in the commit message or be squashed into whatever patch
requires it (and also point out in that commit message why it's
required).

Thanks,
drew