On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 07:06:38PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> RINTC structures in the MADT provide mapping between the hartid
> and the CPU. This is required many times even at run time like
> cpuinfo. So, instead of parsing the ACPI table every time, cache
> the RINTC structures and provide a function to get the correct
> RINTC structure for a given cpu.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h | 9 ++++++
> arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h
> index 111a8ed10af1..8be16c1ef7da 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h
> @@ -61,6 +61,10 @@ static inline void arch_fix_phys_package_id(int num, u32 slot) { }
>
> int acpi_get_riscv_isa(struct acpi_table_header *table,
> unsigned int cpu, const char **isa);
> +
> +struct acpi_madt_rintc *acpi_cpu_get_madt_rintc(int cpu);
> +
> +u32 get_acpi_id_for_cpu(int cpu);
> #else
> static inline int acpi_get_riscv_isa(struct acpi_table_header *table,
> unsigned int cpu, const char **isa)
> @@ -68,6 +72,11 @@ static inline int acpi_get_riscv_isa(struct acpi_table_header *table,
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> +static inline u32 get_acpi_id_for_cpu(int cpu)
> +{
> + return -1;
> +}
Why do we need this stub? I wouldn't expect non-ACPI code to need an ACPI
ID.
> +
> #endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */
>
> #endif /*_ASM_ACPI_H*/
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c
> index 81d448c41714..8b3d68d8225f 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,62 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_disabled);
> int acpi_pci_disabled = 1; /* skip ACPI PCI scan and IRQ initialization */
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_pci_disabled);
>
> +static struct acpi_madt_rintc cpu_madt_rintc[NR_CPUS];
> +
> +static int acpi_parse_madt_rintc(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, const unsigned long end)
> +{
> + struct acpi_madt_rintc *rintc = (struct acpi_madt_rintc *)header;
> + int cpuid;
> +
> + if (!(rintc->flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED))
> + return 0;
Why not cache the data even when its disabled? We also cache the flags so
we can always check later too.
> +
> + cpuid = riscv_hartid_to_cpuid(rintc->hart_id);
> + if (cpuid >= 0 && cpuid < NR_CPUS)
What does it mean for the above check to fail? Bad ACPI tables?
> + cpu_madt_rintc[cpuid] = *rintc;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int acpi_init_rintc_array(void)
> +{
> + if (acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_RINTC, acpi_parse_madt_rintc, 0) > 0)
> + return 0;
> +
> + return -ENODEV;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Instead of parsing (and freeing) the ACPI table, cache
> + * the RINTC structures since they are frequently used
> + * like in cpuinfo.
> + */
> +struct acpi_madt_rintc *acpi_cpu_get_madt_rintc(int cpu)
> +{
> + static bool rintc_init_done;
> +
> + if (!rintc_init_done) {
> + if (acpi_init_rintc_array()) {
> + pr_err("No valid RINTC entries exist\n");
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + rintc_init_done = true;
> + }
> +
> + return &cpu_madt_rintc[cpu];
> +}
> +
> +u32 get_acpi_id_for_cpu(int cpu)
> +{
> + struct acpi_madt_rintc *rintc = acpi_cpu_get_madt_rintc(cpu);
> +
> + if (!rintc)
> + return -1;
Is -1 defined as an invalid ACPI ID? I'm wondering if we shouldn't just
BUG in acpi_init_rintc_array() if we fail to initialize and then we can
unconditionally return rintc->uid here.
> +
> + return rintc->uid;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * __acpi_map_table() will be called before paging_init(), so early_ioremap()
> * or early_memremap() should be called here to for ACPI table mapping.
> --
> 2.34.1
>
Thanks,
drew
