On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 06:21:13PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 04:58:53PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 05:05:56PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > I think I asked for this (or assumed it existed) in v1, when I requested
> > the removal of #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI stuff in riscv_fill_hwcap().
> > Personally, I'd rather have this stub than the ifdeffery :)
> >
>
> Yeah, avoiding #ifdefs with stubs is good if we need to call the function
> from non-ACPI code. I'm wondering why we'd need to, though. In all the
> cases introduced with this series, we could pass a 'cpu' to
> acpi_get_riscv_isa() and then have acpi_get_riscv_isa() call
> get_acpi_id_for_cpu() itself, for example.
>
Yes, that's a good idea to avoid the stub. Will update. Thanks!
> We also need to be sure -1 truly means "no ACPI ID" in order to stub this.
>
Yes, with your BUG suggestion I can remove this.
Thanks,
Sunil
