On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 12:42 PM Sunil V L <sunilvl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Haibo,
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 10:31:59AM +0800, Haibo Xu wrote:
> > Add RINTC affinity structure handler during parsing SRAT table.
> > The ARCH specific implementation will be added in next patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Haibo Xu <haibo1.xu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/numa/srat.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > include/linux/acpi.h | 3 +++
> > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/numa/srat.c b/drivers/acpi/numa/srat.c
> > index 0214518fc582..503abcf6125d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/numa/srat.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/numa/srat.c
> > @@ -165,6 +165,19 @@ acpi_table_print_srat_entry(struct acpi_subtable_header *header)
> > }
> > }
> > break;
> > +
> > + case ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_RINTC_AFFINITY:
> > + {
> > + struct acpi_srat_rintc_affinity *p =
> > + (struct acpi_srat_rintc_affinity *)header;
> > + pr_debug("SRAT Processor (acpi id[0x%04x]) in proximity domain %d %s\n",
> > + p->acpi_processor_uid,
> > + p->proximity_domain,
> > + (p->flags & ACPI_SRAT_RINTC_ENABLED) ?
> > + "enabled" : "disabled");
> > + }
> > + break;
> > +
> > default:
> > pr_warn("Found unsupported SRAT entry (type = 0x%x)\n",
> > header->type);
> > @@ -448,6 +461,21 @@ acpi_parse_gi_affinity(union acpi_subtable_headers *header,
> > }
> > #endif /* defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined (CONFIG_ARM64) */
> >
> > +static int __init
> > +acpi_parse_rintc_affinity(union acpi_subtable_headers *header,
> > + const unsigned long end)
> Alignment doesn't look right. Could you please run checkpatch on all
> the patches?
>
Seems something is wrong with my vim configuration.
Will fix it in v2.
> > +{
> > + struct acpi_srat_rintc_affinity *rintc_affinity;
> > +
> > + rintc_affinity = (struct acpi_srat_rintc_affinity *)header;
> > + acpi_table_print_srat_entry(&header->common);
> > +
> > + /* let architecture-dependent part to do it */
> > + acpi_numa_rintc_affinity_init(rintc_affinity);
> > +
> Is it required to have this commit first prior to architecture
> functionality? I am wondering whether it is logically better to
> implement the function first and then consume in next commit?
>
No dependency between this commit and the next commit.
Will change the order in v2.
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int __initdata parsed_numa_memblks;
> >
> > static int __init
> > @@ -501,7 +529,7 @@ int __init acpi_numa_init(void)
> >
> > /* SRAT: System Resource Affinity Table */
> > if (!acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_SRAT, acpi_parse_srat)) {
> > - struct acpi_subtable_proc srat_proc[4];
> > + struct acpi_subtable_proc srat_proc[5];
> >
> > memset(srat_proc, 0, sizeof(srat_proc));
> > srat_proc[0].id = ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_CPU_AFFINITY;
> > @@ -512,6 +540,8 @@ int __init acpi_numa_init(void)
> > srat_proc[2].handler = acpi_parse_gicc_affinity;
> > srat_proc[3].id = ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_GENERIC_AFFINITY;
> > srat_proc[3].handler = acpi_parse_gi_affinity;
> > + srat_proc[4].id = ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_RINTC_AFFINITY;
> > + srat_proc[4].handler = acpi_parse_rintc_affinity;
> >
> > acpi_table_parse_entries_array(ACPI_SIG_SRAT,
> > sizeof(struct acpi_table_srat),
> > diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> > index b7165e52b3c6..a65273db55c6 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> > @@ -269,6 +269,9 @@ acpi_numa_gicc_affinity_init(struct acpi_srat_gicc_affinity *pa) { }
> >
> > int acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init (struct acpi_srat_mem_affinity *ma);
> >
> > +static inline void
> > +acpi_numa_rintc_affinity_init(struct acpi_srat_rintc_affinity *pa) { }
> > +
> I think this can be fit in single like as we can have upto 100
> characters.
>
Sure. will fix it in v2.
Thanks,
Haibo
> > #ifndef PHYS_CPUID_INVALID
> > typedef u32 phys_cpuid_t;
> > #define PHYS_CPUID_INVALID (phys_cpuid_t)(-1)
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
