Patch Set 10:

Patch Set 10:

I'm not sure if these comments will create any kind of action. And I mean, what's the right way to go about this? Should acpi_write_processor be adapted to not emit a Processor() but a Device()? In that case, the comments at all the call sites are misguided.


Yes, shouldn't use "Processor()".
you are right. I'll keep the comment only in arc/x86

Did Kernel side have backward compatibility? Do we need to keep both definition and let OS to choose?

View Change

To view, visit change 37876. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.

Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: Ic9ea2ed6a2128dc4fe94155d098c2a4f7c24d82f
Gerrit-Change-Number: 37876
Gerrit-PatchSet: 11
Gerrit-Owner: HAOUAS Elyes <ehaouas@noos.fr>
Gerrit-Reviewer: HAOUAS Elyes <ehaouas@noos.fr>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Lance Zhao <lance.zhao@gmail.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Matt DeVillier <matt.devillier@gmail.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h@gmx.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Patrick Rudolph <patrick.rudolph@9elements.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Patrick Rudolph <siro@das-labor.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Gerrit-CC: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Gerrit-CC: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 15:05:32 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: No
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Gerrit-MessageType: comment