From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20EF235C6A9; Thu, 13 Aug 2026 23:26:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786663593; cv=none; b=GTjJKwTd3pun5R6CLYoL7LS7VNr1xNA9IYcVusYnfoNsntAaij/BTHpkjRAFraimzEELZNx3J7n9jR5zINZ92zXFULCixLEnl4ZPmUuD/Fx7RFwsT+1LLu+nizHOVSl5YZn3fCg5QnZQiKCk94AOyvJH0ARo/mFvbHedJ9yAISA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786663593; c=relaxed/simple; bh=FOdsv0T6tna6jX2s3430Y1k5X79rCGiFdnTAwrd8TDE=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=S/lFUNPgqhGe7O56YHIF8Udbl6z6On/k+8tM5k9ydOFVDMvAL6uI+7vyPyC2ZgvdOUEKdYi9XiDuhv0ItDp47dI8K10aG7B3MmYn0peWrLRaTzkeiPKg4EczC3mJeeD3v/DLFb7gE9/AuOS0qMLHVlbdp/T8w9kO8QRWSIiuvbo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=nTBlh7oa; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="nTBlh7oa" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 89F001F000E9; Thu, 13 Aug 2026 23:26:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1786663591; bh=qV5p4gtZT2z1Hkd6GtPMesYurodCH4YxhFo0bPvv/Ao=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=nTBlh7oavSC9m9ntSJxHmAoEAHzG6kc61xNTSMoE7gU5y++91x9iucZiE0mVna/Q4 UvktB02Y4sWKh4ley2Wy0+fAU9UHtEbgbqlrU6yy1o/le22qmWDKBEwFIYIsy7bpIF 7nxYqykFksRt7BNAs+Z1l3MOxFNtVXfLMRxtdx2KFdwTU9VrCUd5PkuRsexj3JAoqa lPEUWkV6Hp3uEg+5t1Zivq3lcuam2JHospOtDD0ocT302YjPtk/jPzrDhpQienOt55 6vTnUfRckyIzvragnKQ9otWwn3TPKf5Vruh9Z103DChrWUUDTCPmb66t0fJaA08J7P lxON2dXm26/6w== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v10 5/8] ACPI: Centralize acpi_get_cpu_uid() declaration in include/linux/acpi.h Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Chengwen Feng" Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260401081640.26875-6-fengchengwen@huawei.com> References: <20260401081640.26875-6-fengchengwen@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 23:26:26 +0000 Message-Id: <20260813232631.89F001F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] Build breakage when CONFIG_ACPI is disabled due to missing acpi_get= _cpu_uid() stub. -- --- Patch [5]: [PATCH RESEND v10 5/8] ACPI: Centralize acpi_get_cpu_uid() d= eclaration in include/linux/acpi.h --- commit f99931b839a856d11d22796fd0c23424af139915 Author: Chengwen Feng ACPI: Centralize acpi_get_cpu_uid() declaration in include/linux/acpi.h This commit centralizes the acpi_get_cpu_uid() declaration into the global scope in include/linux/acpi.h and removes the architecture-specific declarations. This unifies the interface and eliminates duplicate prototype= s. > diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h > index fbf0c3a65f598..f7e50e9cfb224 100644 > --- a/include/linux/acpi.h > +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h [ ... ] > @@ -323,6 +323,17 @@ int acpi_unmap_cpu(int cpu); > =20 > acpi_handle acpi_get_processor_handle(int cpu); > =20 > +/** > + * acpi_get_cpu_uid() - Get ACPI Processor UID of from MADT table > + * @cpu: Logical CPU number (0-based) > + * @uid: Pointer to store ACPI Processor UID > + * > + * Return: 0 on success (ACPI Processor ID stored in *uid); > + * -EINVAL if CPU number is invalid or out of range; > + * -ENODEV if ACPI Processor UID for the CPU is not found. > + */ > +int acpi_get_cpu_uid(unsigned int cpu, u32 *uid); > + [Severity: Low] Does this cause a build failure when CONFIG_ACPI is disabled? The declarati= on is added here, but it appears there is no static inline stub provided in the !CONFIG_ACPI section of the header. Callers outside of ACPI-specific code seem to use this function unconditionally. For example, in arch/x86/xen/enlighten_hvm.c within xen_cpu_up_prepare_hvm(): if (acpi_get_cpu_uid(cpu, &cpu_uid) =3D=3D 0) Without a static inline stub returning an error code (like -ENODEV) when CONFIG_ACPI is not set, does compiling x86 with CONFIG_XEN_PVHVM enabled and CONFIG_ACPI disabled result in an implicit function declaration and undefin= ed reference linker error? > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_IOAPIC > int acpi_get_ioapic_id(acpi_handle handle, u32 gsi_base, u64 *phys_addr); > #endif --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260401081640.2687= 5-1-fengchengwen@huawei.com?part=3D5