All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>,
	"grant.likely@linaro.org" <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	"graeme.gregory@linaro.org" <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@arm.com>,
	"jcm@redhat.com" <jcm@redhat.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Charles Garcia-Tobin <Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com>,
	"phoenix.liyi@huawei.com" <phoenix.liyi@huawei.com>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>,
	"suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
	wangyijing@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Parse MADT for SMP initialization
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 15:16:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150120151628.GI5398@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54BE53A3.5010706@linaro.org>

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 01:09:55PM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote:

[...]

> >> +{
> >> +       int cpu;
> >> +
> >> +       if (mpidr == INVALID_HWID) {
> >> +               pr_info("Skip MADT cpu entry with invalid MPIDR\n");
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       total_cpus++;
> >> +       if (!enabled)
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +       if (enabled_cpus >=  NR_CPUS) {
> >> +               pr_warn("NR_CPUS limit of %d reached, Processor %d/0x%llx ignored.\n",
> >> +                       NR_CPUS, total_cpus, mpidr);
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* No need to check duplicate MPIDRs for the first CPU */
> >> +       if (enabled_cpus) {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * Duplicate MPIDRs are a recipe for disaster. Scan
> >> +                * all initialized entries and check for
> >> +                * duplicates. If any is found just ignore the CPU.
> >> +                */
> >> +               for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> >> +                       if (cpu_logical_map(cpu) == mpidr) {
> >> +                               pr_err("Firmware bug, duplicate CPU MPIDR: 0x%llx in MADT\n",
> >> +                                      mpidr);
> >> +                               return -EINVAL;
> >> +                       }
> >> +               }
> >> +
> >> +               /* allocate a logical cpu id for the new comer */
> >> +               cpu = cpumask_next_zero(-1, cpu_possible_mask);
> >> +       } else {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * First GICC entry must be BSP as ACPI spec said
> >> +                * in section 5.2.12.15
> >> +                */
> >> +               if  (cpu_logical_map(0) != mpidr) {
> >> +                       pr_err("First GICC entry with MPIDR 0x%llx is not BSP\n",
> >> +                              mpidr);
> >> +                       return -EINVAL;
> >> +               }
> >> +
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * boot_cpu_init() already hold bit 0 in cpu_present_mask
> >
> > You mean cpu_possible_mask ? That's what you allocate from above.
> 
> Another hot-plug piece leaved, will update it.
> 
> >
> >> +                * for BSP, no need to allocate again.
> >> +                */
> >> +               cpu = 0;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* CPU 0 was already initialized */
> >> +       if (cpu) {
> >> +               cpu_ops[cpu] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >> +               if (!cpu_ops[cpu])
> >> +                       return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +               if (cpu_ops[cpu]->cpu_init(NULL, cpu))
> >> +                       return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> +
> >> +               /* map the logical cpu id to cpu MPIDR */
> >> +               cpu_logical_map(cpu) = mpidr;
> >> +
> >> +               set_cpu_possible(cpu, true);
> >> +       } else {
> >> +               /* get cpu0's ops, no need to return if ops is null */
> >> +               cpu_ops[0] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >> +       }
> >
> > I do not see much point in calling cpu_get_ops with NULL, and adding
> > the check in it to return NULL when the parameter is NULL.
> >
> > What would you expect from cpu_get_ops when called with NULL other than
> > a NULL pointer ?
> 
> I'm lost here since it is best way for the implementation I think, any
> suggestions?

My suggestion is: no PSCI, no secondaries booting, that's what your code
wants to achieve, right ? What's the point in calling cpu_get_ops() when
PSCI is not present then ? What do you expect from calling cpu_get_ops(NULL)
other than a NULL pointer in return ?

Put it differently, if !acpi_psci_present() parsing code should bail out,
there are no CPU ops to initialize for secondaries, that's what I think
your aim is, correct ?

On a side note, if ACPI PSCI is not present you still keep booting on
the boot processor.

What piece of code initialize cpu_ops[0] in that case ? I could not
find any, basically you would run the kernel with cpu_ops[0] == NULL.

> 
> >
> > You could move:
> >
> > cpu_ops[cpu] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >
> > out of the if and remove the else, do not know if it makes code clearer,
> > shorter for certain.
> >
> >> +
> >> +       enabled_cpus++;
> >> +       return cpu;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static int __init
> >> +acpi_parse_gic_cpu_interface(struct acpi_subtable_header *header,
> >> +                               const unsigned long end)
> >> +{
> >> +       struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *processor;
> >> +
> >> +       processor = (struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *)header;
> >> +
> >> +       if (BAD_MADT_ENTRY(processor, end))
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +       acpi_table_print_madt_entry(header);
> >> +
> >> +       acpi_map_gic_cpu_interface(processor->arm_mpidr & MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK,
> >> +               processor->flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED);
> >> +
> >> +       return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +/* Parse GIC cpu interface entries in MADT for SMP init */
> >> +void __init acpi_smp_init_cpus(void)
> >> +{
> >> +       int count;
> >> +
> >> +       /*
> >> +        * do a partial walk of MADT to determine how many CPUs
> >> +        * we have including disabled CPUs, and get information
> >> +        * we need for SMP init
> >> +        */
> >> +       count = acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_GENERIC_INTERRUPT,
> >> +                       acpi_parse_gic_cpu_interface, 0);
> >> +
> >> +       if (!count) {
> >> +               pr_err("No GIC CPU interface entries present\n");
> >> +               return;
> >> +       } else if (count < 0) {
> >> +               pr_err("Error parsing GIC CPU interface entry\n");
> >> +               return;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* Make boot-up look pretty */
> >> +       pr_info("%d CPUs enabled, %d CPUs total\n", enabled_cpus, total_cpus);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>   static int __init acpi_parse_fadt(struct acpi_table_header *table)
> >>   {
> >>          struct acpi_table_fadt *fadt = (struct acpi_table_fadt *)table;
> >> @@ -62,8 +196,20 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_fadt(struct acpi_table_header *table)
> >>           * to get arm boot flags, or we will disable ACPI.
> >>           */
> >>          if (table->revision > 5 ||
> >> -           (table->revision == 5 && fadt->minor_revision >= 1))
> >> -               return 0;
> >> +           (table->revision == 5 && fadt->minor_revision >= 1)) {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * ACPI 5.1 only has two explicit methods to boot up SMP,
> >> +                * PSCI and Parking protocol, but the Parking protocol is
> >> +                * only specified for ARMv7 now, so make PSCI as the only
> >> +                * way for the SMP boot protocol before some updates for
> >> +                * the ACPI spec or the Parking protocol spec.
> >> +                */
> >> +               if (acpi_psci_present())
> >> +                       return 0;
> >> +
> >> +               pr_warn("No PSCI support, will not bring up secondary CPUs\n");
> >> +               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> +       }
> >>
> >>          pr_warn("Unsupported FADT revision %d.%d, should be 5.1+, will disable ACPI\n",
> >>                  table->revision, fadt->minor_revision);
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> index cce9524..1ea7b9f 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ extern const struct cpu_operations cpu_psci_ops;
> >>
> >>   const struct cpu_operations *cpu_ops[NR_CPUS];
> >>
> >> -static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] __initconst = {
> >> +static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] = {
> >
> > This __initconst removal should be explained either with code needing
> > it or through a comment. You can't make changes with future patches
> > in mind, since they may never get merged and you leave code in this
> > patch incomplete.
> >
> > As far as I know if physical CPU hotplug can't/won't be done on ARM64 your
> > patch would make changes that are not needed, and miss some changes
> > that are (eg removing enabled_cpus or make it __initdata).
> 
> I agree with you :)
> 
> >
> > You can't write a patch with assumptions on subsequent patches.
> >
> >>   #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >>          &smp_spin_table_ops,
> >>   #endif
> >> @@ -35,10 +35,13 @@ static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] __initconst = {
> >>          NULL,
> >>   };
> >>
> >> -static const struct cpu_operations * __init cpu_get_ops(const char *name)
> >> +const struct cpu_operations *cpu_get_ops(const char *name)
> >
> > Ditto.
> >
> >>   {
> >>          const struct cpu_operations **ops = supported_cpu_ops;
> >>
> >> +       if (!name)
> >> +               return NULL;
> >> +
> >
> > See above.
> >
> >>          while (*ops) {
> >>                  if (!strcmp(name, (*ops)->name))
> >>                          return *ops;
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> index ef5b1e1..54e39e3 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> @@ -414,13 +414,16 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> >>          if (acpi_disabled) {
> >>                  unflatten_device_tree();
> >>                  psci_dt_init();
> >> +               cpu_read_bootcpu_ops();
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >> +               of_smp_init_cpus();
> >> +#endif
> >>          } else {
> >>                  psci_acpi_init();
> >> +               acpi_smp_init_cpus();
> >
> > With DT you call cpu_read_bootcpu_ops() and then of_smp_init_cpus()
> > with acpi you have one function that does both, it is not really
> > neat.
> 
> The mechanism for ACPI table entry scanning is that for every matched
> structure (such as GICC) found, the parse function will be called, so
> if we separate them it will duplicate the scanning of ACPI tables.

Call it acpi_init_cpus() then.

Lorenzo

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com (Lorenzo Pieralisi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v7 10/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Parse MADT for SMP initialization
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 15:16:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150120151628.GI5398@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54BE53A3.5010706@linaro.org>

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 01:09:55PM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote:

[...]

> >> +{
> >> +       int cpu;
> >> +
> >> +       if (mpidr == INVALID_HWID) {
> >> +               pr_info("Skip MADT cpu entry with invalid MPIDR\n");
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       total_cpus++;
> >> +       if (!enabled)
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +       if (enabled_cpus >=  NR_CPUS) {
> >> +               pr_warn("NR_CPUS limit of %d reached, Processor %d/0x%llx ignored.\n",
> >> +                       NR_CPUS, total_cpus, mpidr);
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* No need to check duplicate MPIDRs for the first CPU */
> >> +       if (enabled_cpus) {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * Duplicate MPIDRs are a recipe for disaster. Scan
> >> +                * all initialized entries and check for
> >> +                * duplicates. If any is found just ignore the CPU.
> >> +                */
> >> +               for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> >> +                       if (cpu_logical_map(cpu) == mpidr) {
> >> +                               pr_err("Firmware bug, duplicate CPU MPIDR: 0x%llx in MADT\n",
> >> +                                      mpidr);
> >> +                               return -EINVAL;
> >> +                       }
> >> +               }
> >> +
> >> +               /* allocate a logical cpu id for the new comer */
> >> +               cpu = cpumask_next_zero(-1, cpu_possible_mask);
> >> +       } else {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * First GICC entry must be BSP as ACPI spec said
> >> +                * in section 5.2.12.15
> >> +                */
> >> +               if  (cpu_logical_map(0) != mpidr) {
> >> +                       pr_err("First GICC entry with MPIDR 0x%llx is not BSP\n",
> >> +                              mpidr);
> >> +                       return -EINVAL;
> >> +               }
> >> +
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * boot_cpu_init() already hold bit 0 in cpu_present_mask
> >
> > You mean cpu_possible_mask ? That's what you allocate from above.
> 
> Another hot-plug piece leaved, will update it.
> 
> >
> >> +                * for BSP, no need to allocate again.
> >> +                */
> >> +               cpu = 0;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* CPU 0 was already initialized */
> >> +       if (cpu) {
> >> +               cpu_ops[cpu] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >> +               if (!cpu_ops[cpu])
> >> +                       return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +               if (cpu_ops[cpu]->cpu_init(NULL, cpu))
> >> +                       return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> +
> >> +               /* map the logical cpu id to cpu MPIDR */
> >> +               cpu_logical_map(cpu) = mpidr;
> >> +
> >> +               set_cpu_possible(cpu, true);
> >> +       } else {
> >> +               /* get cpu0's ops, no need to return if ops is null */
> >> +               cpu_ops[0] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >> +       }
> >
> > I do not see much point in calling cpu_get_ops with NULL, and adding
> > the check in it to return NULL when the parameter is NULL.
> >
> > What would you expect from cpu_get_ops when called with NULL other than
> > a NULL pointer ?
> 
> I'm lost here since it is best way for the implementation I think, any
> suggestions?

My suggestion is: no PSCI, no secondaries booting, that's what your code
wants to achieve, right ? What's the point in calling cpu_get_ops() when
PSCI is not present then ? What do you expect from calling cpu_get_ops(NULL)
other than a NULL pointer in return ?

Put it differently, if !acpi_psci_present() parsing code should bail out,
there are no CPU ops to initialize for secondaries, that's what I think
your aim is, correct ?

On a side note, if ACPI PSCI is not present you still keep booting on
the boot processor.

What piece of code initialize cpu_ops[0] in that case ? I could not
find any, basically you would run the kernel with cpu_ops[0] == NULL.

> 
> >
> > You could move:
> >
> > cpu_ops[cpu] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >
> > out of the if and remove the else, do not know if it makes code clearer,
> > shorter for certain.
> >
> >> +
> >> +       enabled_cpus++;
> >> +       return cpu;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static int __init
> >> +acpi_parse_gic_cpu_interface(struct acpi_subtable_header *header,
> >> +                               const unsigned long end)
> >> +{
> >> +       struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *processor;
> >> +
> >> +       processor = (struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *)header;
> >> +
> >> +       if (BAD_MADT_ENTRY(processor, end))
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +       acpi_table_print_madt_entry(header);
> >> +
> >> +       acpi_map_gic_cpu_interface(processor->arm_mpidr & MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK,
> >> +               processor->flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED);
> >> +
> >> +       return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +/* Parse GIC cpu interface entries in MADT for SMP init */
> >> +void __init acpi_smp_init_cpus(void)
> >> +{
> >> +       int count;
> >> +
> >> +       /*
> >> +        * do a partial walk of MADT to determine how many CPUs
> >> +        * we have including disabled CPUs, and get information
> >> +        * we need for SMP init
> >> +        */
> >> +       count = acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_GENERIC_INTERRUPT,
> >> +                       acpi_parse_gic_cpu_interface, 0);
> >> +
> >> +       if (!count) {
> >> +               pr_err("No GIC CPU interface entries present\n");
> >> +               return;
> >> +       } else if (count < 0) {
> >> +               pr_err("Error parsing GIC CPU interface entry\n");
> >> +               return;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* Make boot-up look pretty */
> >> +       pr_info("%d CPUs enabled, %d CPUs total\n", enabled_cpus, total_cpus);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>   static int __init acpi_parse_fadt(struct acpi_table_header *table)
> >>   {
> >>          struct acpi_table_fadt *fadt = (struct acpi_table_fadt *)table;
> >> @@ -62,8 +196,20 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_fadt(struct acpi_table_header *table)
> >>           * to get arm boot flags, or we will disable ACPI.
> >>           */
> >>          if (table->revision > 5 ||
> >> -           (table->revision == 5 && fadt->minor_revision >= 1))
> >> -               return 0;
> >> +           (table->revision == 5 && fadt->minor_revision >= 1)) {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * ACPI 5.1 only has two explicit methods to boot up SMP,
> >> +                * PSCI and Parking protocol, but the Parking protocol is
> >> +                * only specified for ARMv7 now, so make PSCI as the only
> >> +                * way for the SMP boot protocol before some updates for
> >> +                * the ACPI spec or the Parking protocol spec.
> >> +                */
> >> +               if (acpi_psci_present())
> >> +                       return 0;
> >> +
> >> +               pr_warn("No PSCI support, will not bring up secondary CPUs\n");
> >> +               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> +       }
> >>
> >>          pr_warn("Unsupported FADT revision %d.%d, should be 5.1+, will disable ACPI\n",
> >>                  table->revision, fadt->minor_revision);
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> index cce9524..1ea7b9f 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ extern const struct cpu_operations cpu_psci_ops;
> >>
> >>   const struct cpu_operations *cpu_ops[NR_CPUS];
> >>
> >> -static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] __initconst = {
> >> +static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] = {
> >
> > This __initconst removal should be explained either with code needing
> > it or through a comment. You can't make changes with future patches
> > in mind, since they may never get merged and you leave code in this
> > patch incomplete.
> >
> > As far as I know if physical CPU hotplug can't/won't be done on ARM64 your
> > patch would make changes that are not needed, and miss some changes
> > that are (eg removing enabled_cpus or make it __initdata).
> 
> I agree with you :)
> 
> >
> > You can't write a patch with assumptions on subsequent patches.
> >
> >>   #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >>          &smp_spin_table_ops,
> >>   #endif
> >> @@ -35,10 +35,13 @@ static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] __initconst = {
> >>          NULL,
> >>   };
> >>
> >> -static const struct cpu_operations * __init cpu_get_ops(const char *name)
> >> +const struct cpu_operations *cpu_get_ops(const char *name)
> >
> > Ditto.
> >
> >>   {
> >>          const struct cpu_operations **ops = supported_cpu_ops;
> >>
> >> +       if (!name)
> >> +               return NULL;
> >> +
> >
> > See above.
> >
> >>          while (*ops) {
> >>                  if (!strcmp(name, (*ops)->name))
> >>                          return *ops;
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> index ef5b1e1..54e39e3 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> @@ -414,13 +414,16 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> >>          if (acpi_disabled) {
> >>                  unflatten_device_tree();
> >>                  psci_dt_init();
> >> +               cpu_read_bootcpu_ops();
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >> +               of_smp_init_cpus();
> >> +#endif
> >>          } else {
> >>                  psci_acpi_init();
> >> +               acpi_smp_init_cpus();
> >
> > With DT you call cpu_read_bootcpu_ops() and then of_smp_init_cpus()
> > with acpi you have one function that does both, it is not really
> > neat.
> 
> The mechanism for ACPI table entry scanning is that for every matched
> structure (such as GICC) found, the parse function will be called, so
> if we separate them it will duplicate the scanning of ACPI tables.

Call it acpi_init_cpus() then.

Lorenzo

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>,
	"grant.likely@linaro.org" <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	"graeme.gregory@linaro.org" <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@arm.com>,
	"jcm@redhat.com" <jcm@redhat.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Charles Garcia-Tobin <Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com>,
	"phoenix.liyi@huawei.com" <phoenix.liyi@huawei.com>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>,
	"suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
	"wangyijing@huawei.com" <wangyijing@huawei.com>,
	"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org>,
	Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Parse MADT for SMP initialization
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 15:16:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150120151628.GI5398@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54BE53A3.5010706@linaro.org>

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 01:09:55PM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote:

[...]

> >> +{
> >> +       int cpu;
> >> +
> >> +       if (mpidr == INVALID_HWID) {
> >> +               pr_info("Skip MADT cpu entry with invalid MPIDR\n");
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       total_cpus++;
> >> +       if (!enabled)
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +       if (enabled_cpus >=  NR_CPUS) {
> >> +               pr_warn("NR_CPUS limit of %d reached, Processor %d/0x%llx ignored.\n",
> >> +                       NR_CPUS, total_cpus, mpidr);
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* No need to check duplicate MPIDRs for the first CPU */
> >> +       if (enabled_cpus) {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * Duplicate MPIDRs are a recipe for disaster. Scan
> >> +                * all initialized entries and check for
> >> +                * duplicates. If any is found just ignore the CPU.
> >> +                */
> >> +               for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> >> +                       if (cpu_logical_map(cpu) == mpidr) {
> >> +                               pr_err("Firmware bug, duplicate CPU MPIDR: 0x%llx in MADT\n",
> >> +                                      mpidr);
> >> +                               return -EINVAL;
> >> +                       }
> >> +               }
> >> +
> >> +               /* allocate a logical cpu id for the new comer */
> >> +               cpu = cpumask_next_zero(-1, cpu_possible_mask);
> >> +       } else {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * First GICC entry must be BSP as ACPI spec said
> >> +                * in section 5.2.12.15
> >> +                */
> >> +               if  (cpu_logical_map(0) != mpidr) {
> >> +                       pr_err("First GICC entry with MPIDR 0x%llx is not BSP\n",
> >> +                              mpidr);
> >> +                       return -EINVAL;
> >> +               }
> >> +
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * boot_cpu_init() already hold bit 0 in cpu_present_mask
> >
> > You mean cpu_possible_mask ? That's what you allocate from above.
> 
> Another hot-plug piece leaved, will update it.
> 
> >
> >> +                * for BSP, no need to allocate again.
> >> +                */
> >> +               cpu = 0;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* CPU 0 was already initialized */
> >> +       if (cpu) {
> >> +               cpu_ops[cpu] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >> +               if (!cpu_ops[cpu])
> >> +                       return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +               if (cpu_ops[cpu]->cpu_init(NULL, cpu))
> >> +                       return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> +
> >> +               /* map the logical cpu id to cpu MPIDR */
> >> +               cpu_logical_map(cpu) = mpidr;
> >> +
> >> +               set_cpu_possible(cpu, true);
> >> +       } else {
> >> +               /* get cpu0's ops, no need to return if ops is null */
> >> +               cpu_ops[0] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >> +       }
> >
> > I do not see much point in calling cpu_get_ops with NULL, and adding
> > the check in it to return NULL when the parameter is NULL.
> >
> > What would you expect from cpu_get_ops when called with NULL other than
> > a NULL pointer ?
> 
> I'm lost here since it is best way for the implementation I think, any
> suggestions?

My suggestion is: no PSCI, no secondaries booting, that's what your code
wants to achieve, right ? What's the point in calling cpu_get_ops() when
PSCI is not present then ? What do you expect from calling cpu_get_ops(NULL)
other than a NULL pointer in return ?

Put it differently, if !acpi_psci_present() parsing code should bail out,
there are no CPU ops to initialize for secondaries, that's what I think
your aim is, correct ?

On a side note, if ACPI PSCI is not present you still keep booting on
the boot processor.

What piece of code initialize cpu_ops[0] in that case ? I could not
find any, basically you would run the kernel with cpu_ops[0] == NULL.

> 
> >
> > You could move:
> >
> > cpu_ops[cpu] = cpu_get_ops(acpi_psci_present() ? "psci" : NULL);
> >
> > out of the if and remove the else, do not know if it makes code clearer,
> > shorter for certain.
> >
> >> +
> >> +       enabled_cpus++;
> >> +       return cpu;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static int __init
> >> +acpi_parse_gic_cpu_interface(struct acpi_subtable_header *header,
> >> +                               const unsigned long end)
> >> +{
> >> +       struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *processor;
> >> +
> >> +       processor = (struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *)header;
> >> +
> >> +       if (BAD_MADT_ENTRY(processor, end))
> >> +               return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> +       acpi_table_print_madt_entry(header);
> >> +
> >> +       acpi_map_gic_cpu_interface(processor->arm_mpidr & MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK,
> >> +               processor->flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED);
> >> +
> >> +       return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +/* Parse GIC cpu interface entries in MADT for SMP init */
> >> +void __init acpi_smp_init_cpus(void)
> >> +{
> >> +       int count;
> >> +
> >> +       /*
> >> +        * do a partial walk of MADT to determine how many CPUs
> >> +        * we have including disabled CPUs, and get information
> >> +        * we need for SMP init
> >> +        */
> >> +       count = acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_GENERIC_INTERRUPT,
> >> +                       acpi_parse_gic_cpu_interface, 0);
> >> +
> >> +       if (!count) {
> >> +               pr_err("No GIC CPU interface entries present\n");
> >> +               return;
> >> +       } else if (count < 0) {
> >> +               pr_err("Error parsing GIC CPU interface entry\n");
> >> +               return;
> >> +       }
> >> +
> >> +       /* Make boot-up look pretty */
> >> +       pr_info("%d CPUs enabled, %d CPUs total\n", enabled_cpus, total_cpus);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >>   static int __init acpi_parse_fadt(struct acpi_table_header *table)
> >>   {
> >>          struct acpi_table_fadt *fadt = (struct acpi_table_fadt *)table;
> >> @@ -62,8 +196,20 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_fadt(struct acpi_table_header *table)
> >>           * to get arm boot flags, or we will disable ACPI.
> >>           */
> >>          if (table->revision > 5 ||
> >> -           (table->revision == 5 && fadt->minor_revision >= 1))
> >> -               return 0;
> >> +           (table->revision == 5 && fadt->minor_revision >= 1)) {
> >> +               /*
> >> +                * ACPI 5.1 only has two explicit methods to boot up SMP,
> >> +                * PSCI and Parking protocol, but the Parking protocol is
> >> +                * only specified for ARMv7 now, so make PSCI as the only
> >> +                * way for the SMP boot protocol before some updates for
> >> +                * the ACPI spec or the Parking protocol spec.
> >> +                */
> >> +               if (acpi_psci_present())
> >> +                       return 0;
> >> +
> >> +               pr_warn("No PSCI support, will not bring up secondary CPUs\n");
> >> +               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> +       }
> >>
> >>          pr_warn("Unsupported FADT revision %d.%d, should be 5.1+, will disable ACPI\n",
> >>                  table->revision, fadt->minor_revision);
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> index cce9524..1ea7b9f 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_ops.c
> >> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ extern const struct cpu_operations cpu_psci_ops;
> >>
> >>   const struct cpu_operations *cpu_ops[NR_CPUS];
> >>
> >> -static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] __initconst = {
> >> +static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] = {
> >
> > This __initconst removal should be explained either with code needing
> > it or through a comment. You can't make changes with future patches
> > in mind, since they may never get merged and you leave code in this
> > patch incomplete.
> >
> > As far as I know if physical CPU hotplug can't/won't be done on ARM64 your
> > patch would make changes that are not needed, and miss some changes
> > that are (eg removing enabled_cpus or make it __initdata).
> 
> I agree with you :)
> 
> >
> > You can't write a patch with assumptions on subsequent patches.
> >
> >>   #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >>          &smp_spin_table_ops,
> >>   #endif
> >> @@ -35,10 +35,13 @@ static const struct cpu_operations *supported_cpu_ops[] __initconst = {
> >>          NULL,
> >>   };
> >>
> >> -static const struct cpu_operations * __init cpu_get_ops(const char *name)
> >> +const struct cpu_operations *cpu_get_ops(const char *name)
> >
> > Ditto.
> >
> >>   {
> >>          const struct cpu_operations **ops = supported_cpu_ops;
> >>
> >> +       if (!name)
> >> +               return NULL;
> >> +
> >
> > See above.
> >
> >>          while (*ops) {
> >>                  if (!strcmp(name, (*ops)->name))
> >>                          return *ops;
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> index ef5b1e1..54e39e3 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> >> @@ -414,13 +414,16 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> >>          if (acpi_disabled) {
> >>                  unflatten_device_tree();
> >>                  psci_dt_init();
> >> +               cpu_read_bootcpu_ops();
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >> +               of_smp_init_cpus();
> >> +#endif
> >>          } else {
> >>                  psci_acpi_init();
> >> +               acpi_smp_init_cpus();
> >
> > With DT you call cpu_read_bootcpu_ops() and then of_smp_init_cpus()
> > with acpi you have one function that does both, it is not really
> > neat.
> 
> The mechanism for ACPI table entry scanning is that for every matched
> structure (such as GICC) found, the parse function will be called, so
> if we separate them it will duplicate the scanning of ACPI tables.

Call it acpi_init_cpus() then.

Lorenzo

  reply	other threads:[~2015-01-20 15:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 422+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-14 15:04 [PATCH v7 00/17] Introduce ACPI for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1 Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04 ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 01/17] arm64: allow late use of early_ioremap Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:44   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:44     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 02/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Get RSDP and ACPI boot-time tables Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:45   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:45     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 03/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce sleep-arm.c Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:45   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:45     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 04/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce early_param for "acpi" and pass acpi=force to enable ACPI Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:46   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:46     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-19 11:42   ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 11:42     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 11:42     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 11:55     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-19 11:55       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-19 11:55       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-19 13:51       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 13:51         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 13:51         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 14:00         ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-19 14:00           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-19 14:00           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-19 14:22           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 14:22             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 14:22             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 15:13         ` Grant Likely
2015-01-19 15:13           ` Grant Likely
2015-01-19 15:13           ` Grant Likely
2015-01-19 16:59           ` Jon Masters
2015-01-19 16:59             ` Jon Masters
2015-01-19 16:59             ` Jon Masters
2015-01-19 17:52             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 17:52               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 17:52               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 18:01               ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-19 18:01                 ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-19 18:01                 ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-20  9:29                 ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20  9:29                   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20  9:29                   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 10:56                   ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 10:56                     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 10:56                     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 11:10                   ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-20 11:10                     ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-20 11:10                     ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-20 12:17                     ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 12:17                       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 12:17                       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 12:31                     ` Leif Lindholm
2015-01-20 12:31                       ` Leif Lindholm
2015-01-20 12:31                       ` Leif Lindholm
2015-01-20 19:20                   ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-01-20 19:20                     ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-01-20 19:20                     ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-01-21  9:43                     ` Parth Dixit
2015-01-21  9:43                       ` Parth Dixit
2015-01-21  9:43                       ` Parth Dixit
2015-01-21 15:23                     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 15:23                       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 15:23                       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 15:29                       ` Jon Masters
2015-01-21 15:29                         ` Jon Masters
2015-01-21 15:29                         ` Jon Masters
2015-01-21 15:42                         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 15:42                           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 15:42                           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 15:56                           ` Graeme Gregory
2015-01-21 15:56                             ` Graeme Gregory
2015-01-21 15:56                             ` Graeme Gregory
2015-01-21 16:05                           ` Jon Masters
2015-01-21 16:05                             ` Jon Masters
2015-01-21 16:05                             ` Jon Masters
2015-01-21 16:16                             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 16:16                               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 16:16                               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-21 16:51                               ` Parth Dixit
2015-01-21 16:51                                 ` Parth Dixit
2015-01-21 16:51                                 ` Parth Dixit
2015-01-21 16:10                       ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-01-21 16:10                         ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-01-21 16:10                         ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-01-22 12:29                         ` Daniel Kiper
2015-01-22 12:29                           ` Daniel Kiper
2015-01-22 12:29                           ` Daniel Kiper
2015-01-28 17:58   ` [Linaro-acpi] " Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 17:58     ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 17:58     ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 18:08     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-28 18:08       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-28 18:08       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-28 18:08     ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 18:08       ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 18:08       ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 18:14       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-28 18:14         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-28 18:14         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-28 18:18         ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 18:18           ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 18:18           ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-29 15:19           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 15:19             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 15:19             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 18:20             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-29 18:20               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-29 18:20               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-29 18:21               ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-29 18:21                 ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-29 18:21                 ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-29 18:28                 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-29 18:28                   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-29 18:28                   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-29 18:34                   ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-29 18:34                     ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-29 18:34                     ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-29 18:44                     ` Jon Masters
2015-01-29 18:44                       ` Jon Masters
2015-01-29 18:44                       ` Jon Masters
2015-01-29 23:11                       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 23:11                         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 23:11                         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 23:16                         ` Jon Masters
2015-01-29 23:16                           ` Jon Masters
2015-01-29 23:16                           ` Jon Masters
2015-01-29 23:30                           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 23:30                             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 23:30                             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-30 11:13               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-30 11:13                 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-30 11:13                 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-30 14:48                 ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-30 14:48                   ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-30 14:48                   ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-30 15:12                   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-30 15:12                     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-30 15:12                     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 05/17] ARM64 / ACPI: If we chose to boot from acpi then disable FDT Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:46   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:46     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-19 11:45   ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 11:45     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 11:45     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 06/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Make PCI optional for ACPI on ARM64 Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:46   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:46     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-16  9:49   ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16  9:49     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16  9:49     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-18  6:25     ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  6:25       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  6:25       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  6:31       ` Jon Masters
2015-01-18  6:31         ` Jon Masters
2015-01-18  6:31         ` Jon Masters
2015-01-18  6:46         ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  6:46           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  6:46           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  9:29           ` Graeme Gregory
2015-01-18  9:29             ` Graeme Gregory
2015-01-18  9:29             ` Graeme Gregory
2015-01-18 12:32             ` Jon Masters
2015-01-18 12:32               ` Jon Masters
2015-01-18 12:32               ` Jon Masters
2015-01-19  4:26             ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-19  4:26               ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-19  4:26               ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-19 10:37             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 10:37               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 10:37               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 10:42       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 10:42         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 10:42         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20  2:39         ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20  2:39           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20  2:39           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 11:00           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 11:00             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 11:00             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 11:56             ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 11:56               ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 11:56               ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 12:26             ` [Linaro-acpi] " Tomasz Nowicki
2015-01-20 12:26               ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-01-20 15:10               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 15:10                 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 15:10                 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 07/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Disable ACPI if FADT revision is less than 5.1 Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:47   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:47     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-16 14:33   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-16 14:33     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-16 14:33     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-18  5:49     ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  5:49       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  5:49       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-19 11:50   ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 11:50     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-19 11:50     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20  3:05     ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20  3:05       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20  3:05       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 08/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Get PSCI flags in FADT for PSCI init Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:47   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:47     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 09/17] ACPI / table: Print GIC information when MADT is parsed Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:47   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:47     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 10/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Parse MADT for SMP initialization Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:48   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:48     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-16 18:18   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-16 18:18     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-16 18:18     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-20 13:09     ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 13:09       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 13:09       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 15:16       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2015-01-20 15:16         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-20 15:16         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH v7 11/17] ACPI / processor: Make it possible to get CPU hardware ID via GICC Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:48   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:48     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-20 11:17   ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 11:17     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 11:17     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-20 12:26     ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 12:26       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 12:26       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-20 16:16   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-20 16:16     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-20 16:16     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-01-14 15:05 ` [PATCH v7 12/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce ACPI_IRQ_MODEL_GIC and register device's gsi Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:05   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:48   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:48     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-16 10:45   ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-16 10:45     ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-16 10:45     ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-14 15:05 ` [PATCH v7 13/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Add GICv2 specific ACPI boot support Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:05   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:50   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:50     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-16 11:15   ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-16 11:15     ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-16 11:15     ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-16 13:54     ` Grant Likely
2015-01-16 13:54       ` Grant Likely
2015-01-16 13:54       ` Grant Likely
2015-01-16 14:37       ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-16 14:37         ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-16 14:37         ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-22 12:46         ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-22 12:46           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-22 12:46           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-22 14:46           ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-22 14:46             ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-22 14:46             ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-23  9:38             ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-23  9:38               ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-23  9:38               ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-27 16:12         ` Grant Likely
2015-01-27 16:12           ` Grant Likely
2015-01-27 16:12           ` Grant Likely
2015-01-29 15:29           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 15:29             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 15:29             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-29 16:06             ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-01-29 16:06               ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-01-29 16:06               ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-01-20 10:40     ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-01-20 10:40       ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-01-20 10:40       ` Tomasz Nowicki
2015-01-20 13:05       ` Jon Masters
2015-01-20 13:05         ` Jon Masters
2015-01-14 15:05 ` [PATCH v7 14/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Parse GTDT to initialize arch timer Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:05   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:50   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:50     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-14 15:05 ` [PATCH v7 15/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Select ACPI_REDUCED_HARDWARE_ONLY if ACPI is enabled on ARM64 Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:05   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:50   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:50     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-14 15:05 ` [PATCH v7 16/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Enable ARM64 in Kconfig Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:05   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:50   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:50     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-14 15:05 ` [PATCH v7 17/17] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64 Hanjun Guo
2015-01-14 15:05   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 18:54   ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 18:54     ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-15 16:26 ` [PATCH v7 00/17] Introduce ACPI for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1 Grant Likely
2015-01-15 16:26   ` Grant Likely
2015-01-15 16:26   ` Grant Likely
2015-01-15 18:23   ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-15 18:23     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-15 18:23     ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-15 19:02     ` Mark Brown
2015-01-15 19:02       ` Mark Brown
2015-01-15 19:02       ` Mark Brown
2015-01-15 20:04       ` Jason Cooper
2015-01-15 20:04         ` Jason Cooper
2015-01-15 20:04         ` Jason Cooper
2015-01-15 20:31         ` Mark Brown
2015-01-15 20:31           ` Mark Brown
2015-01-15 20:31           ` Mark Brown
2015-01-15 20:51           ` Jason Cooper
2015-01-15 20:51             ` Jason Cooper
2015-01-15 20:51             ` Jason Cooper
2015-01-16 11:49             ` Mark Brown
2015-01-16 11:49               ` Mark Brown
2015-01-16 11:49               ` Mark Brown
2015-01-16  7:24           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-16  7:24             ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-16  7:24             ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-16 10:10         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 10:10           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 10:10           ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 12:05           ` Mark Brown
2015-01-16 12:05             ` Mark Brown
2015-01-16 12:05             ` Mark Brown
2015-01-16 12:29             ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 12:29               ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 12:29               ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 16:54               ` Mark Brown
2015-01-16 16:54                 ` Mark Brown
2015-01-16 16:54                 ` Mark Brown
2015-01-18  6:36           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  6:36             ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-18  6:36             ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 21:31     ` Al Stone
2015-01-15 21:31       ` Al Stone
2015-01-15 21:31       ` Al Stone
2015-01-15 21:38       ` Jon Masters
2015-01-15 21:38         ` Jon Masters
2015-01-15 21:38         ` Jon Masters
2015-01-16 10:20       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 10:20         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 10:20         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 15:17         ` [Linaro-acpi] " Al Stone
2015-01-16 15:17           ` Al Stone
2015-01-16 15:23           ` Al Stone
2015-01-16 15:23             ` Al Stone
2015-01-16 15:44           ` Suravee Suthikulpanit
2015-01-16 15:44             ` Suravee Suthikulpanit
2015-01-16 15:44             ` Suravee Suthikulpanit
2015-01-16  7:17     ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-16  7:17       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-16  7:17       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-16 10:04       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 10:04         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 10:04         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 14:45       ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 14:45         ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 14:45         ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 14:55         ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 14:55           ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 14:55           ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 15:14           ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:14             ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:14             ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:25             ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 15:25               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 15:25               ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-16 15:33             ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 15:33               ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 15:33               ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 15:40               ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:40                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:40                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:43                 ` [Linaro-acpi] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:43                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:49                 ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 15:49                   ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 15:49                   ` Will Deacon
2015-01-16 15:53                   ` [Linaro-acpi] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 15:53                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-17 17:53                     ` Rob Herring
2015-01-17 17:53                       ` Rob Herring
2015-01-16 17:12                   ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 17:12                     ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 17:12                     ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 15:16           ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 15:16             ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 15:16             ` Tom Lendacky
2015-01-16 16:29     ` Grant Likely
2015-01-16 16:29       ` Grant Likely
2015-01-16 16:29       ` Grant Likely
2015-01-16 17:20       ` [Linaro-acpi] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-16 17:20         ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-17 11:52       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-17 11:52         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-17 11:52         ` Catalin Marinas
2015-01-15 18:58 ` Jon Masters
2015-01-15 18:58   ` Jon Masters
2015-01-15 19:49 ` Mark Langsdorf
2015-01-16  8:37   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-15 21:33 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-01-15 21:33   ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-01-15 21:33   ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-01-27 17:46 ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-27 17:46   ` Timur Tabi
2015-01-28 13:53   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-28 13:53     ` Hanjun Guo
2015-01-28 13:53     ` Hanjun Guo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150120151628.GI5398@red-moon \
    --to=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com \
    --cc=Marc.Zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=Mark.Rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=Sudeep.Holla@arm.com \
    --cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=graeme.gregory@linaro.org \
    --cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
    --cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
    --cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
    --cc=jcm@redhat.com \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    --cc=phoenix.liyi@huawei.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=rric@kernel.org \
    --cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    --cc=timur@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=wangyijing@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.