From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: x2apic entry with uid < 255 could use processor statement
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:34:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C5739D6.1070507@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1280782411.2703.21.camel@sbsiddha-MOBL3.sc.intel.com>
On 08/02/2010 01:53 PM, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-02 at 13:18 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Suresh Siddha
>> <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2010-07-31 at 07:51 +0100, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>> According to Intel x2apic spec page 46
>>>>
>>>> " The hand-off to
>>>> OSPM will have processor IDs in the range of 0 to 254 for xAPIC/x2APIC and 0 to 255
>>>> for SAPIC declared as either Processor() or Device() objects, but not both. Processor
>>>> IDs outside these ranges must be declared as Device() objects."
>>>>
>>>> So only check if Device is used when acpi_id >=255.
>>>>
>>>> that will help system with less 255 cpus, but some cpus apic id > 255,
>>>> still can use Processor statement instead of Device() objects.
>>>
>>> But the entries with apic_id < 255 are supposed to use local APIC
>>> structure and not local x2apic structure. So entries with apic id < 255
>>> must be processed using map_lapic_id() which doesn't have any
>>> device_declaration checks.
>>>
>>> Only for apic ids > 255, we use map_x2apic_id() which needs device
>>> declaration. So this patch is not needed. or Am I missing something?
>>
>> it is acpi_id aka Processor id.
>>
>> the system has less than 255 cpus, but some cpus apic_id > 255.
>> BIOS have apic entries for apic_id < 255, and some x2apic entries for
>> apic_id > 255.
>>
>> but BIOS still use Processor statement for all cpus.
>
> Ok. I think there might be some confusion or mis-interpretation of the
> words here. You referred to x2apic spec page 46, perhaps this is an
> older version. Newer x2apic version leaves all the ACPI definitions to
> the ACPI 4.0 spec.
>
> And here is what ACPI 4.0 spec says:
>
> In Table5-33 for processor local x2apic structure:
>
> ACPI Processor UID
> 4
> 12
> OSPM associates the X2APIC Structure with a processor object declared in
> the namespace using the Device statement, when the _UID child object of
> the processor device evaluates to a numeric value, by matching the
> numeric value with this field
>
> And in page 312:
>
> <snip>
> The platform may declare processors with IDs in the range of 0-254 for
> APIC/x2APIC implementations and 0-255 for SAPIC implementations using
> either the ASL Processor statement or the ASL Device statement but not
> both. Processors with IDs outside these ranges must be declared using
> the ASL Device statement.
> </snip>
>
> And in the above paragraph "processors with IDs" are APIC id's and not
> ACPI Id's.
>
> So I think your bios need to implement ACPI device objects for the
> x2apic entries.
that is confusing.
thanks. I will ask BIOS to fix that.
Yinghai
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-02 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-31 6:51 [PATCH] acpi: x2apic entry with uid < 255 could use processor statement Yinghai Lu
2010-08-02 19:06 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-08-02 20:18 ` Yinghai Lu
2010-08-02 20:53 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-08-02 21:34 ` Yinghai Lu [this message]
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=4C5739D6.1070507@kernel.org \
--to=yinghai@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).