On 2014年07月08日 05:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 02, 2014 04:47:24 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> From: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Now ARM64 support is being added to ACPI so architecture specific
>> values can not be used in core ACPI code.
>>
>> Following on the patch "ACPI / processor: Check if LAPIC is present
>> during initialization" which uses acpi_lapic in acpi_processor.c,
>> on ARM64 platform, GIC is used instead of local APIC, so acpi_lapic
>> is not a suitable value for ARM64.
>>
>> What is actually important at this point is the SMPness of the system,
>> so introduce acpi_arch_is_smp() to be arch specific and generic.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h | 5 +++++
>> arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h | 5 +++++
>> drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 2 +-
>> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> index 75dc59a..2fc0757 100644
>> --- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> +++ b/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h
>> @@ -40,6 +40,11 @@ extern int acpi_lapic;
>> #define acpi_noirq 0 /* ACPI always enabled on IA64 */
>> #define acpi_pci_disabled 0 /* ACPI PCI always enabled on IA64 */
>> #define acpi_strict 1 /* no ACPI spec workarounds on IA64 */
>> +
>> +static inline bool acpi_arch_is_smp(void)
> Why this name? In particular, local APIC being present doesn't imply SMP.
Hmm, agreed. How about acpi_has_cpu_in_madt()? As we know,
Local APIC/SAPIC in MADT stands for CPU in the system, how about
the function name above?
>
>> +{
>> + return acpi_lapic;
> Also
>
> return !!acpi_lapic;
>
> would be cleaner IMO.
>
I will update it as you suggested.
Thanks
Hanjun
--
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
