On Sat, 2010-07-31 at 07:51 +0100, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> According to Intel x2apic spec page 46
>
> " The hand-off to
> OSPM will have processor IDs in the range of 0 to 254 for xAPIC/x2APIC and 0 to 255
> for SAPIC declared as either Processor() or Device() objects, but not both. Processor
> IDs outside these ranges must be declared as Device() objects."
>
> So only check if Device is used when acpi_id >=255.
>
> that will help system with less 255 cpus, but some cpus apic id > 255,
> still can use Processor statement instead of Device() objects.
But the entries with apic_id < 255 are supposed to use local APIC
structure and not local x2apic structure. So entries with apic id < 255
must be processed using map_lapic_id() which doesn't have any
device_declaration checks.
Only for apic ids > 255, we use map_x2apic_id() which needs device
declaration. So this patch is not needed. or Am I missing something?
thanks,
suresh
>
> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ static int map_x2apic_id(struct acpi_sub
> if (!(apic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED))
> return 0;
>
> - if (device_declaration && (apic->uid == acpi_id)) {
> + if ((device_declaration || (acpi_id < 255)) && (apic->uid == acpi_id)) {
> *apic_id = apic->local_apic_id;
> return 1;
> }
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
