On 2013-6-28 17:35, Andrea Gallo wrote:
On 28 June 2013 06:41, Hanjun Guo hanjun.guo@linaro.org wrote:
On 2013-6-28 4:07, Graeme Gregory wrote:
Hi Hanjun,
This looks like a good start for cpu support.
yes, this is also is a start for APICs (LEG-465 card).
I have a query about the terminology, a lot of your comments still refer to APIC is this correct terminology on arm?
When I hack the code, I also have this question in my mind. APIC is not the correct terminology on arm, It is GIC and GIC distributor on arm, something like local APIC and IOAPIC on x86.
I think we should keep things consistent in the code, either GIC or APIC, I would prefer GIC, what's your opinion, Al, Graeme?
I would stay consistent to ACPI in the ACPI code, to avoid confusion and bad reaction from the upstream maintainers... they are 99.999999% from x86 so they will reject any terminology change. And it would cause confusion.
I would anyway add comments here and there as "// APIC = GIC on ARM"
Hi Andrea,
Good point, Thanks for the wonderful advice! I think Al also have the same opinion, I will update my patch set.
Thanks Hanjun
that's just my 2c :-)
/Andrea
Thanks Hanjun