From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: guohanjun@huawei.com (Hanjun Guo)
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:49:33 +0800
Subject: [patch v11 13/23] ACPI / processor: Introduce phys_cpuid_t for
 CPU hardware ID
In-Reply-To: <20150325172109.GJ14585@localhost>
References: <1427205776-5060-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
 <1427205776-5060-14-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
 <20150325172109.GJ14585@localhost>
Message-ID: <551381CD.5010804@huawei.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 2015/3/26 1:21, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:02:46PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> CPU hardware ID (phys_id) is defined as u32 in structure acpi_processor,
>> but phys_id is used as int in acpi processor driver, so it will lead to
>> some inconsistence for the drivers.
>>
>> Furthermore, to cater for ACPI arch ports that implement 64 bits CPU
>> ids a generic CPU physical id type is required.
>>
>> So introduce typedef u32 phys_cpuid_t in a common file, and introduce
>> a macro PHYS_CPUID_INVALID as (phys_cpuid_t)(-1) if it's not defined
>> by other archs, this will solve the inconsistence in acpi processor driver,
>> and will prepare for the ACPI on ARM64 for the 64 bit CPU hardware ID
>> in the following patch.
>>
>> CC: Rafael J Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
>> Suggested-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>
>> Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
>> Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
>> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> [hj: reworked cpu physid map return codes]
>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
> BTW, am I still the author of this patch? If yes, it's missing a From:
> line.

Oops, you should be the author, can Will fix this in his tree?

>
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
>> @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>>  	acpi_status status;
>>  	int ret;
>>  
>> -	if (pr->phys_id == -1)
>> +	if (pr->phys_id == PHYS_CPUID_INVALID)
>>  		return -ENODEV;
> If PHYS_CPUID_INVALID is the same as INVALID_HWID, we should get rid of
> the latter in the arm64 code (as a subsequent clean-up patch).

OK, I'm preparing a patch set to introduce invalid_phys_cpuid() and invalid_logical_cpuid()
to remove the direct comparison of PHYS_CPUID_INVALID and -1 in ACPI processor drivers,
which is suggested by Rafael, I will cleanup PHYS_CPUID_INVALID in this patch set.

Thanks
Hanjun
>