On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:02:46PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > CPU hardware ID (phys_id) is defined as u32 in structure acpi_processor, > but phys_id is used as int in acpi processor driver, so it will lead to > some inconsistence for the drivers. > > Furthermore, to cater for ACPI arch ports that implement 64 bits CPU > ids a generic CPU physical id type is required. > > So introduce typedef u32 phys_cpuid_t in a common file, and introduce > a macro PHYS_CPUID_INVALID as (phys_cpuid_t)(-1) if it's not defined > by other archs, this will solve the inconsistence in acpi processor driver, > and will prepare for the ACPI on ARM64 for the 64 bit CPU hardware ID > in the following patch. > > CC: Rafael J Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Suggested-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> > [hj: reworked cpu physid map return codes] > Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx> BTW, am I still the author of this patch? If yes, it's missing a From: line. > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c > @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr) > acpi_status status; > int ret; > > - if (pr->phys_id == -1) > + if (pr->phys_id == PHYS_CPUID_INVALID) > return -ENODEV; If PHYS_CPUID_INVALID is the same as INVALID_HWID, we should get rid of the latter in the arm64 code (as a subsequent clean-up patch). -- Catalin -- 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
