Re: [BUG, REGRESSION] ACPI: Set _PDC

[Alex Chiang <achiang@canonical.com>]

* Chen Gong <gong.chen@linux.intel.com>:
> >On Thursday 17 June 2010 05:24:14 Alex Chiang wrote:
> >>diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> >>index 5128435..bcf0cf8 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> >>@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ static bool processor_physically_present(acpi_handle handle)
> >>  	type = (acpi_type == ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE) ? 1 : 0;
> >>  	cpuid = acpi_get_cpuid(handle, type, acpi_id);
> >>
> >>-	if (cpuid == -1)
> >>+	if ((cpuid == -1)&&  (num_online_cpus()>  1))
> >>  		return false;
> >>
> >>  	return true;
> >>
> I have a puzzle why num_online_cpus is used here, instead of
> num_possible_cpus. It will be possible under a hotplug scenario.

Hm, you're probably right.

I was following the example of the other usage of
acpi_get_cpuid() in acpi_processor_get_info(), but based on your
observation, it's probably better to use num_possible_cpus.

I'll change it when I submit a proper patch.

Thanks for the review.

/ac