Re: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI: Disambiguate processor declaration type

[Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>]

On Monday 27 October 2008 01:42:37 am Zhao Yakui wrote:
>       Of course please add some comments that the ACPI ID is always
> obtained from the processor block if the processor object is declared by
> processor.

The code's pretty straightforward already, but maybe comments like
this would address your concern:

    if (!strcmp(acpi_device_hid(device), ACPI_PROCESSOR_HID)) {
+       /*
+        * Declared with "Device" statement; match _UID.
+        * Note that we don't handle string _UID yet.
+        */
        acpi_evaluate_integer(pr->handle, METHOD_NAME__UID, NULL, &value);
        pr->acpi_id = value;
    } else {
+       /* Declared with "Processor" statement; match ProcessorID */
        acpi_evaluate_object(pr->handle, NULL, NULL, &buffer);
        pr->acpi_id = object.processor.proc_id;
    }

>      If the [_UID] is a string, it should be matched with the
> ACPI processor UID string field of SAPIC table to get the processor ID.
> Now this case is not handled by your patch. Of course maybe there
> doesn't exist such a system. So we can ask the user to send the ACPIdump
> and then add the corresponding support when a string is returned by the
> _UID object. It will be great if we can add the support about this.

That would be nice, but since we don't have a machine to test it with,
Myron would be adding untested code to the kernel, and I don't think
there's much value in that.

Bjorn