From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
<linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <loongarch@lists.linux.dev>,
<linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>,
<x86@kernel.org>, <acpica-devel@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
<linux-csky@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>,
Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
<jianyong.wu@arm.com>, <justin.he@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 01/21] ACPI: Only enumerate enabled (or functional) devices
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 11:52:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240112115205.000043b0@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZZ/CR/6Voec066DR@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:26:15 +0000
"Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 10:19:49AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 14:39:25 +0000
> > Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 20:47:31 +0100
> > > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Friday, December 15, 2023 5:15:39 PM CET Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 15:31:55 +0000
> > > > > "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 07:37:10PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 7:16 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 7:10 PM Russell King (Oracle)
> > > > > > > > <linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I guess we need something like:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > if (device->status.present)
> > > > > > > > > return device->device_type != ACPI_BUS_TYPE_PROCESSOR ||
> > > > > > > > > device->status.enabled;
> > > > > > > > > else
> > > > > > > > > return device->status.functional;
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > so we only check device->status.enabled for processor-type devices?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yes, something like this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, that is not sufficient, because there are
> > > > > > > ACPI_BUS_TYPE_DEVICE devices representing processors.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm not sure about a clean way to do it ATM.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ok, how about:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > static bool acpi_dev_is_processor(const struct acpi_device *device)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > struct acpi_hardware_id *hwid;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (device->device_type == ACPI_BUS_TYPE_PROCESSOR)
> > > > > > return true;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (device->device_type != ACPI_BUS_TYPE_DEVICE)
> > > > > > return false;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > list_for_each_entry(hwid, &device->pnp.ids, list)
> > > > > > if (!strcmp(ACPI_PROCESSOR_OBJECT_HID, hwid->id) ||
> > > > > > !strcmp(ACPI_PROCESSOR_DEVICE_HID, hwid->id))
> > > > > > return true;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > return false;
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and then:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (device->status.present)
> > > > > > return !acpi_dev_is_processor(device) || device->status.enabled;
> > > > > > else
> > > > > > return device->status.functional;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > Changing it to CPU only for now makes sense to me and I think this code snippet should do the
> > > > > job. Nice and simple.
> > > >
> > > > Well, except that it does checks that are done elsewhere slightly
> > > > differently, which from the maintenance POV is not nice.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe something like the appended patch (untested).
> > >
> > > Hi Rafael,
> > >
> > > As far as I can see that's functionally equivalent, so looks good to me.
> > > I'm not set up to test this today though, so will defer to Russell on whether
> > > there is anything missing
> > >
> > > Thanks for putting this together.
> >
> > This is rather embarrassing...
> >
> > I span this up on a QEMU instance with some prints to find out we need
> > the !acpi_device_is_processor() restriction.
> > On my 'random' test setup it fails on one device. ACPI0017 - which I
> > happen to know rather well. It's the weird pseudo device that lets
> > a CXL aware OS know there is a CEDT table to probe.
> >
> > Whilst I really don't like that hack (it is all about making software
> > distribution of out of tree modules easier rather than something
> > fundamental), I'm the CXL QEMU maintainer :(
> >
> > Will fix that, but it shows there is at least one broken firmware out
> > there.
> >
> > On plus side, Rafael's code seems to work as expected and lets that
> > buggy firwmare carry on working :) So lets pretend the bug in qemu
> > is a deliberate test case!
>
> Lol, thanks for a test case and showing that Rafael's approach is
> indeed necessary.
>
> Would your test quality for a tested-by for this? For reference, this
> is my current version below with Rafael's update:
Sure. This matches what I have.
Tested-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
>
> 8<====
> From: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>
> Subject: [PATCH] ACPI: Only enumerate enabled (or functional) processor
> devices
>
> From: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
>
> Today the ACPI enumeration code 'visits' all devices that are present.
>
> This is a problem for arm64, where CPUs are always present, but not
> always enabled. When a device-check occurs because the firmware-policy
> has changed and a CPU is now enabled, the following error occurs:
> | acpi ACPI0007:48: Enumeration failure
>
> This is ultimately because acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration() returns
> true for a device that is not enabled. The ACPI Processor driver
> will not register such CPUs as they are not 'decoding their resources'.
>
> ACPI allows a device to be functional instead of maintaining the
> present and enabled bit, but we can't simply check the enabled bit
> for all devices since firmware can be buggy.
>
> If ACPI indicates that the device is present and enabled, then all well
> and good, we can enumate it. However, if the device is present and not
> enabled, then we also check whether the device is a processor device
> to limit the impact of this new check to just processor devices.
>
> This avoids enumerating present && functional processor devices that
> are not enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> Co-developed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>
> ---
> Changes since RFC v2:
> * Incorporate comment suggestion by Gavin Shan.
> Changes since RFC v3:
> * Fixed "sert" typo.
> Changes since RFC v3 (smaller series):
> * Restrict checking the enabled bit to processor devices, update
> commit comments.
> * Use Rafael's suggestion in
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/5760569.DvuYhMxLoT@kreacher
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 11 ++++++++
> drivers/acpi/device_pm.c | 2 +-
> drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c | 2 +-
> drivers/acpi/internal.h | 4 ++-
> drivers/acpi/property.c | 2 +-
> drivers/acpi/scan.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 6 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> index 4fe2ef54088c..cf7c1cca69dd 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> @@ -626,6 +626,17 @@ static struct acpi_scan_handler processor_handler = {
> },
> };
>
> +bool acpi_device_is_processor(const struct acpi_device *adev)
> +{
> + if (adev->device_type == ACPI_BUS_TYPE_PROCESSOR)
> + return true;
> +
> + if (adev->device_type != ACPI_BUS_TYPE_DEVICE)
> + return false;
> +
> + return acpi_scan_check_handler(adev, &processor_handler);
> +}
> +
> static int acpi_processor_container_attach(struct acpi_device *dev,
> const struct acpi_device_id *id)
> {
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> index 3b4d048c4941..e3c80f3b3b57 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> @@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ int acpi_bus_init_power(struct acpi_device *device)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> device->power.state = ACPI_STATE_UNKNOWN;
> - if (!acpi_device_is_present(device)) {
> + if (!acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(device)) {
> device->flags.initialized = false;
> return -ENXIO;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c b/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
> index 23373faa35ec..a0256d2493a7 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/device_sysfs.c
> @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ static int create_pnp_modalias(const struct acpi_device *acpi_dev, char *modalia
> struct acpi_hardware_id *id;
>
> /* Avoid unnecessarily loading modules for non present devices. */
> - if (!acpi_device_is_present(acpi_dev))
> + if (!acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(acpi_dev))
> return 0;
>
> /*
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/internal.h b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> index 866c7c4ed233..9388d4c8674a 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> @@ -62,6 +62,8 @@ void acpi_sysfs_add_hotplug_profile(struct acpi_hotplug_profile *hotplug,
> int acpi_scan_add_handler_with_hotplug(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler,
> const char *hotplug_profile_name);
> void acpi_scan_hotplug_enabled(struct acpi_hotplug_profile *hotplug, bool val);
> +bool acpi_scan_check_handler(const struct acpi_device *adev,
> + struct acpi_scan_handler *handler);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> extern struct dentry *acpi_debugfs_dir;
> @@ -107,7 +109,6 @@ int acpi_device_setup_files(struct acpi_device *dev);
> void acpi_device_remove_files(struct acpi_device *dev);
> void acpi_device_add_finalize(struct acpi_device *device);
> void acpi_free_pnp_ids(struct acpi_device_pnp *pnp);
> -bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct acpi_device *adev);
> bool acpi_device_is_battery(struct acpi_device *adev);
> bool acpi_device_is_first_physical_node(struct acpi_device *adev,
> const struct device *dev);
> @@ -119,6 +120,7 @@ int acpi_bus_register_early_device(int type);
> const struct acpi_device *acpi_companion_match(const struct device *dev);
> int __acpi_device_uevent_modalias(const struct acpi_device *adev,
> struct kobj_uevent_env *env);
> +bool acpi_device_is_processor(const struct acpi_device *adev);
>
> /* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Power Resource
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/property.c b/drivers/acpi/property.c
> index 6979a3f9f90a..14d6948fd88a 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/property.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/property.c
> @@ -1420,7 +1420,7 @@ static bool acpi_fwnode_device_is_available(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
> if (!is_acpi_device_node(fwnode))
> return false;
>
> - return acpi_device_is_present(to_acpi_device_node(fwnode));
> + return acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(to_acpi_device_node(fwnode));
> }
>
> static const void *
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/scan.c b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> index 02bb2cce423f..f94d1f744bcc 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> @@ -304,7 +304,7 @@ static int acpi_scan_device_check(struct acpi_device *adev)
> int error;
>
> acpi_bus_get_status(adev);
> - if (acpi_device_is_present(adev)) {
> + if (acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(adev)) {
> /*
> * This function is only called for device objects for which
> * matching scan handlers exist. The only situation in which
> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ static int acpi_scan_bus_check(struct acpi_device *adev, void *not_used)
> int error;
>
> acpi_bus_get_status(adev);
> - if (!acpi_device_is_present(adev)) {
> + if (!acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(adev)) {
> acpi_scan_device_not_enumerated(adev);
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -1913,11 +1913,6 @@ static bool acpi_device_should_be_hidden(acpi_handle handle)
> return true;
> }
>
> -bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct acpi_device *adev)
> -{
> - return adev->status.present || adev->status.functional;
> -}
> -
> static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler,
> const char *idstr,
> const struct acpi_device_id **matchid)
> @@ -1938,6 +1933,18 @@ static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler,
> return false;
> }
>
> +bool acpi_scan_check_handler(const struct acpi_device *adev,
> + struct acpi_scan_handler *handler)
> +{
> + struct acpi_hardware_id *hwid;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(hwid, &adev->pnp.ids, list)
> + if (acpi_scan_handler_matching(handler, hwid->id, NULL))
> + return true;
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> static struct acpi_scan_handler *acpi_scan_match_handler(const char *idstr,
> const struct acpi_device_id **matchid)
> {
> @@ -2381,16 +2388,38 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_clear_dependencies);
> * acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration - Check if the ACPI device is ready for enumeration
> * @device: Pointer to the &struct acpi_device to check
> *
> - * Check if the device is present and has no unmet dependencies.
> + * Check if the device is functional or enabled and has no unmet dependencies.
> *
> - * Return true if the device is ready for enumeratino. Otherwise, return false.
> + * Return true if the device is ready for enumeration. Otherwise, return false.
> */
> bool acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration(const struct acpi_device *device)
> {
> if (device->flags.honor_deps && device->dep_unmet)
> return false;
>
> - return acpi_device_is_present(device);
> + /*
> + * ACPI 6.5's 6.3.7 "_STA (Device Status)" allows firmware to return
> + * (!present && functional) for certain types of devices that should be
> + * enumerated. Note that the enabled bit should not be set unless the
> + * present bit is set.
> + *
> + * However, limit this only to processor devices to reduce possible
> + * regressions with firmware.
> + */
> + if (device->status.functional)
> + return true;
> +
> + if (!device->status.present)
> + return false;
> +
> + /*
> + * Fast path - if enabled is set, avoid the more expensive test to
> + * check whether this device is a processor.
> + */
> + if (device->status.enabled)
> + return true;
> +
> + return !acpi_device_is_processor(device);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_ready_for_enumeration);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-12 11:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 121+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-13 12:47 [RFC PATCH v3 00/21] ACPI/arm64: add support for virtual cpu hotplug Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 01/21] ACPI: Only enumerate enabled (or functional) devices Russell King
2023-12-14 17:32 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-14 17:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-14 18:10 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-14 18:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-14 18:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-15 15:31 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-15 16:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-15 19:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-02 14:39 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-11 10:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-11 10:26 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-12 11:52 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2024-01-29 14:55 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-29 15:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-29 15:16 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-29 15:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-22 7:31 ` Gavin Shan
2023-12-14 17:55 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 02/21] ACPI: processor: Add support for processors described as container packages Russell King
2023-12-14 17:36 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-14 17:57 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-18 20:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-09 15:49 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-09 16:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-09 16:13 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-11 16:17 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-11 17:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-11 18:46 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-12 9:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-12 15:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-12 15:03 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-15 10:47 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 03/21] ACPI: processor: Register CPUs that are online, but not described in the DSDT Russell King
2023-12-18 20:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-15 11:06 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-22 16:02 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-22 16:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-22 17:30 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 9:27 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-25 13:56 ` Miguel Luis
2024-01-25 14:42 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-29 13:03 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-29 15:32 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-22 17:27 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 04/21] ACPI: processor: Register all CPUs from acpi_processor_get_info() Russell King
2023-12-14 17:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-18 20:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-22 17:44 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-22 18:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-22 21:56 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 05/21] ACPI: Rename ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU to include 'present' Russell King
2023-12-14 17:41 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-14 18:00 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-18 20:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-22 18:00 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-23 13:28 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 16:15 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-23 16:36 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 17:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-23 18:19 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 18:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-23 18:59 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 19:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-23 20:09 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 20:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-23 20:57 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 21:12 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 22:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-01-24 8:45 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 06/21] ACPI: Move acpi_bus_trim_one() before acpi_scan_hot_remove() Russell King
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 07/21] ACPI: Rename acpi_processor_hotadd_init and remove pre-processor guards Russell King
2023-12-14 17:43 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-14 18:03 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 08/21] ACPI: Add post_eject to struct acpi_scan_handler for cpu hotplug Russell King
2023-12-13 12:49 ` [PATCH RFC v3 09/21] ACPI: convert acpi_processor_post_eject() to use IS_ENABLED() Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-15 16:11 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 10/21] ACPI: Check _STA present bit before making CPUs not present Russell King
2023-12-15 16:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 11/21] ACPI: Warn when the present bit changes but the feature is not enabled Russell King
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 12/21] arm64: acpi: Move get_cpu_for_acpi_id() to a header Russell King
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 13/21] ACPICA: Add new MADT GICC flags fields Russell King
2023-12-15 16:23 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-15 16:53 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-18 9:23 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-12-18 13:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-12-18 16:28 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-12-27 11:15 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 14/21] irqchip/gic-v3: Don't return errors from gic_acpi_match_gicc() Russell King
2023-12-15 16:33 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-09 19:27 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 10:08 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 15/21] irqchip/gic-v3: Add support for ACPI's disabled but 'online capable' CPUs Russell King
2023-12-15 16:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 16/21] arm64: psci: Ignore DENIED CPUs Russell King
2023-12-15 16:40 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 17/21] ACPI: add support to register CPUs based on the _STA enabled bit Russell King
2023-12-18 13:03 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-02 14:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-23 10:26 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-23 13:10 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 14:22 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-23 14:59 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 18/21] ACPI: processor: Only call arch_unregister_cpu() if HOTPLUG_CPU is selected Russell King
2023-12-15 16:50 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-18 12:58 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-23 10:29 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 19/21] arm64: document virtual CPU hotplug's expectations Russell King
2023-12-15 17:04 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 20/21] ACPI: Add _OSC bits to advertise OS support for toggling CPU present/enabled Russell King
2023-12-15 17:12 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-02 13:07 ` Jose Marinho
2024-01-02 15:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-01-02 15:35 ` Jose Marinho
2024-01-23 10:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-13 12:50 ` [PATCH RFC v3 21/21] cpumask: Add enabled cpumask for present CPUs that can be brought online Russell King
2023-12-15 17:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-18 12:14 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-02 15:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-12-15 19:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=20240112115205.000043b0@Huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=acpica-devel@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=jianyong.wu@arm.com \
--cc=justin.he@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-csky@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=salil.mehta@huawei.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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).