From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from canpmsgout04.his.huawei.com (canpmsgout04.his.huawei.com [113.46.200.219]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F474330D58 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 02:20:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.219 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772763646; cv=none; b=A0CsfrjMSMlo5rNXsm4eoNKr9cQYTJTrVFymHfvhFzQJUO6hF8SLBHH6KlRD2KtUy0+zfLP30wCsiJFHlf/s/Dyem4GBAgDnB1JwiGfFSqXfyfffok0YqMQAbL4i+caLS7+gZfc4ehiHtonESOx/tcmHYf/5iOwHVot+QzwF1YQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772763646; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/6LmCpQyifPooxJtvigqmg0itVhBM9bRxZUXzpxx/jg=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=B3Mmsiq1GIB87KbdkcMCcWX3EjvYjARn9b/9jAvbK/Cdfmt9OGn8ijz1ZhJNrNYyTT0VyBO/a93nsRQXRJQOhmjGwh2hvMtIz/Lc8EAi6SoeQ5+0J5EaLwci1+RMo5oCKq7cbH9fNQ60GmyBRUsndsO91C75T20vt/aP9sjUt74= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b=mwQ0hEls; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.219 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b="mwQ0hEls" dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=huawei.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=63G8v1SmaEgTYdfJTyL6ai9ialxWPrLA+2LQvndcIO8=; b=mwQ0hElsHFrGBY+A3e2KK7IjK1rv0TAkhpGRCNBsH64nmtcpuKi+oWynKmiaLosb7CItekbvd 7Ur566TDm1xinylYA/X8Q+XD14TchvZjfjiy4Cw81UnxzrRRUjK7AmWvdX6Y/jbCiVwouEIKPd8 GTSznfAxZkaV5F0QVZ6bA9E= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.140]) by canpmsgout04.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4fRqkq3J7bz1prLV; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 10:15:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemk500009.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.194.94]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF7C52022B; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 10:20:41 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.121.161] (10.67.121.161) by kwepemk500009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.94) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 10:20:40 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2026 10:20:40 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: loongarch@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI/TPH: Fix get cpu steer-tag fail on ARM64 platform To: Jonathan Cameron CC: Huacai Chen , , , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , WANG Xuerui , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Alexandre Ghiti , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , , "H. Peter Anvin" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Andy Gospodarek , Eric Van Tassell , Ajit Khaparde , Somnath Kotur , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20260303003625.39035-1-fengchengwen@huawei.com> <20260305083650.54611-1-fengchengwen@huawei.com> <795a9167-6c49-4c7c-9a36-385bf543cacf@huawei.com> <20260305145403.0000394e@huawei.com> Content-Language: en-US From: fengchengwen In-Reply-To: <20260305145403.0000394e@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems200001.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.67) To kwepemk500009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.94) On 3/5/2026 10:54 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > >>>> + ret = acpi_get_cpu_acpi_id(cpu); >>> Can we use get_acpi_id_for_cpu() directly? Then just x86 needs a wrapper. >> >> Yes, it indeed simple. >> >> But I prefer to have the acpi_ prefix for such API names because it's a cross-subsystem API reference. > > Can we just do a global rename of get_acpi_id_for_cpu() as a precursor > patch? Then this just becomes adding x86 implementation and using > it on all architectures. Sounds good, done in v3 Thanks > > J > >