From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Vijaya Kumar K <vkilari@codeaurora.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Tomasz Nowicki <Tomasz.Nowicki@cavium.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Richard Ruigrok <rruigrok@qti.qualcomm.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] ACPI / PPTT: cacheinfo: Label caches based on fw_token
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 10:46:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181010094637.GA13498@e107155-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <236eab50-e1d0-e2f5-fb69-95451c4ccc7e@codeaurora.org>
On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 12:34:51PM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> On 10/9/2018 11:58 AM, James Morse wrote:
> >
> > It can be set for a non-leaf entry, I assumed it would always be set for a leaf.
> > Is anyone doing this with a PPTT table?
>
> QDF2400 takes a strict interpretation of the spec, and does not set the flag
> for leaf nodes. I believe there are other implementations which do set the
> flag for leaf nodes.
>
IIRC, based on the discussions when this was added, the ACPI Processor
ID *must be* valid for the lead nodes.T he flag bit corresponding
to that should be considered as don't care as it's always guaranteed
to be valid.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/2] ACPI / PPTT: cacheinfo: Label caches based on fw_token
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 10:46:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181010094637.GA13498@e107155-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <236eab50-e1d0-e2f5-fb69-95451c4ccc7e@codeaurora.org>
On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 12:34:51PM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> On 10/9/2018 11:58 AM, James Morse wrote:
> >
> > It can be set for a non-leaf entry, I assumed it would always be set for a leaf.
> > Is anyone doing this with a PPTT table?
>
> QDF2400 takes a strict interpretation of the spec, and does not set the flag
> for leaf nodes. I believe there are other implementations which do set the
> flag for leaf nodes.
>
IIRC, based on the discussions when this was added, the ACPI Processor
ID *must be* valid for the lead nodes.T he flag bit corresponding
to that should be considered as don't care as it's always guaranteed
to be valid.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-10 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-05 15:02 [RFC PATCH 0/2] ACPI / PPTT: ids for caches James Morse
2018-10-05 15:02 ` James Morse
2018-10-05 15:02 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] ACPI / processor: Add helper to convert acpi_id to a phys_cpuid James Morse
2018-10-05 15:02 ` James Morse
2018-10-05 15:02 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] ACPI / PPTT: cacheinfo: Label caches based on fw_token James Morse
2018-10-05 15:02 ` James Morse
2018-10-09 16:45 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-10-09 16:45 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-10-09 17:58 ` James Morse
2018-10-09 17:58 ` James Morse
2018-10-09 18:34 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-10-09 18:34 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-10-10 9:46 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2018-10-10 9:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-10-10 14:16 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-10-10 14:16 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2019-06-17 8:28 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2019-06-17 8:28 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2019-06-19 13:31 ` James Morse
2019-06-19 13:31 ` James Morse
2018-10-05 15:20 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] ACPI / PPTT: ids for caches Jeffrey Hugo
2018-10-05 15:20 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-10-05 15:54 ` James Morse
2018-10-05 15:54 ` James Morse
2018-10-05 16:39 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-10-05 16:39 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-10-08 9:26 ` James Morse
2018-10-08 9:26 ` James Morse
2018-10-10 16:19 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-10-10 16:19 ` Jeffrey Hugo
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=20181010094637.GA13498@e107155-lin \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=Tomasz.Nowicki@cavium.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=jhugo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=rruigrok@qti.qualcomm.com \
--cc=vkilari@codeaurora.org \
--cc=wangxiongfeng2@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.