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: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:57:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3895a0d8-9cca-2512-a06e-0ee2ac7db773@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0gnspK3soa5j8iqU9QDM78MMBbz8YC9s7TOJ5Qwh7=mZg@mail.gmail.com>
On 02/07/18 10:06, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 6:17 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> OK
>
> Do you regard this as a fix for the recently merged PPTT material? If
> so, I should apply it as a fix for 4.18.
>
Yes, it should be considered as fix IMO.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-02 9:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-29 16:17 [PATCH] ACPI/PPTT: use ACPI ID whenever ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID is set Sudeep Holla
2018-06-29 18:18 ` 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 [this message]
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=3895a0d8-9cca-2512-a06e-0ee2ac7db773@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