From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ACPI/PPTT: use ACPI ID whenever ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID is set
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:17:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1530289077-2444-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> (raw)
Currently we use the ACPI processor ID only for the leaf/processor nodes
as the specification states it must match the value of ACPI processor ID
field in the processor?s entry in the MADT.
However, if a PPTT structure represents processors group, it match a
processor container UID in the namespace and ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID
flag describe whether the ACPI processor ID is valid.
Lets use UID whenever ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID is set to be
consistent instead of using table offset as it's currently done for non
leaf nodes.
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
---
drivers/acpi/pptt.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi,
There's ongoing discussion on assigning ID based in OS using simple
counters. It can never be consistent with firmware's view. So if the
firmware provides valid UID for non-processors node, we must use it.
Regards,
Sudeep
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
index e5ea1974d1e3..d1e26cb599bf 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
@@ -481,8 +481,14 @@ static int topology_get_acpi_cpu_tag(struct acpi_table_header *table,
if (cpu_node) {
cpu_node = acpi_find_processor_package_id(table, cpu_node,
level, flag);
- /* Only the first level has a guaranteed id */
- if (level == 0)
+ /*
+ * As per specification if the processor structure represents
+ * an actual processor, then ACPI processor ID must be valid.
+ * For processor containers ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID
+ * should be set if the UID is valid
+ */
+ if (level == 0 ||
+ cpu_node->flags & ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID)
return cpu_node->acpi_processor_id;
return ACPI_PTR_DIFF(cpu_node, table);
}
--
2.7.4
next reply other threads:[~2018-06-29 16:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-29 16:17 Sudeep Holla [this message]
2018-06-29 18:18 ` [PATCH] ACPI/PPTT: use ACPI ID whenever ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID is set Jeremy Linton
2018-07-02 10:08 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-06-30 7:16 ` Andrew Jones
2018-07-02 10:01 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-07-02 9:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-07-02 9:57 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-07-02 11:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-07-02 12:52 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-07-04 10:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-07-02 14:41 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-07-02 13:23 ` Jeremy Linton
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=1530289077-2444-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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