From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: guohanjun@huawei.com (Hanjun Guo) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 09:42:08 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v5 02/18] ACPI / table: Add new function to get table entries In-Reply-To: <1591450.lUZUanAOs6@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <1413553034-20956-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <1581499.U8906vqSiO@vostro.rjw.lan> <5473F99D.6090505@huawei.com> <1591450.lUZUanAOs6@vostro.rjw.lan> Message-ID: <54752FF0.7080602@huawei.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 2014/11/26 5:20, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 11:38:05 AM Hanjun Guo wrote: >> On 2014/11/24 22:51, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Monday, November 24, 2014 07:03:54 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: >>>> On 2014-11-24 9:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>> On Friday, October 17, 2014 09:36:58 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: >>>>>> From: Ashwin Chaugule >>>>>> >>>>>> The acpi_table_parse() function has a callback that >>>>>> passes a pointer to a table_header. Add a new function >>>>>> which takes this pointer and parses its entries. This >>>>>> eliminates the need to re-traverse all the tables for >>>>>> each call. e.g. as in acpi_table_parse_madt() which is >>>>>> normally called after acpi_table_parse(). >>>>>> >>>>>> Acked-by: Grant Likely >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ashwin Chaugule >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/acpi/tables.c | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- >>>>>> include/linux/acpi.h | 4 +++ >>>>>> 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/tables.c b/drivers/acpi/tables.c >>>>>> index 6d5a6cd..21ae521 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/tables.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/tables.c >>>>>> @@ -192,17 +192,14 @@ void acpi_table_print_madt_entry(struct acpi_subtable_header *header) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> int __init >>>>>> -acpi_table_parse_entries(char *id, >>>>>> - unsigned long table_size, >>>>>> - int entry_id, >>>>>> - acpi_tbl_entry_handler handler, >>>>>> - unsigned int max_entries) >>>>>> +acpi_parse_entries(unsigned long table_size, >>>>>> + acpi_tbl_entry_handler handler, >>>>>> + struct acpi_table_header *table_header, >>>>>> + int entry_id, unsigned int max_entries) >>>>>> { >>>>>> - struct acpi_table_header *table_header = NULL; >>>>>> struct acpi_subtable_header *entry; >>>>>> - unsigned int count = 0; >>>>>> + int count = 0; >>>>>> unsigned long table_end; >>>>>> - acpi_size tbl_size; >>>>>> >>>>>> if (acpi_disabled) >>>>>> return -ENODEV; >>>>>> @@ -210,13 +207,11 @@ acpi_table_parse_entries(char *id, >>>>>> if (!handler) >>>>>> return -EINVAL; >>>>>> >>>>>> - if (strncmp(id, ACPI_SIG_MADT, 4) == 0) >>>>>> - acpi_get_table_with_size(id, acpi_apic_instance, &table_header, &tbl_size); >>>>>> - else >>>>>> - acpi_get_table_with_size(id, 0, &table_header, &tbl_size); >>>>>> + if (!table_size) >>>>>> + return -EINVAL; >>>>>> >>>>>> if (!table_header) { >>>>>> - pr_warn("%4.4s not present\n", id); >>>>>> + pr_warn("Table header not present\n"); >>>>> The message doesn't make sense any more if the table signature is not printed. >> For this message, since no table id is passed, and this message is printed in >> acpi_table_parse_entries() before this function is called, I think we can check >> the table_header before call this function and remove the printed message here. > table_header needs to be checked against NULL in the caller and the message > printed from there to my eyes. ok, I think table id should pass to this function, I will rework this patch and resend. Thanks Hanjun