On 2015年05月05日 19:25, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 05/05/15 03:46, Hanjun Guo wrote:
Introduce invalid_phys_cpuid() to identify cpu with invalid
physical ID, then used it as replacement of the direct comparisons
with PHYS_CPUID_INVALID.
Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 4 ++--
drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 4 ++--
include/linux/acpi.h | 5 +++++
3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
index 62c846b..92a5f73 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
[...]
diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
index 913b49f..cc82ff3 100644
--- a/include/linux/acpi.h
+++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
@@ -163,6 +163,11 @@ static inline bool invalid_logical_cpuid(u32 cpuid)
return (int)cpuid < 0;
}
+static inline bool invalid_phys_cpuid(phys_cpuid_t phys_id)
+{
+ return (int)phys_id < 0;
Should this be phys_id == PHYS_CPUID_INVALID ? else I don't see why we
need to even define PHYS_CPUID_INVALID
Oh, we need PHYS_CPUID_INVALID because we defined
+#ifndef PHYS_CPUID_INVALID
+typedef u32 phys_cpuid_t;
+#define PHYS_CPUID_INVALID (phys_cpuid_t)(-1)
+#endif
in the common head file linux/acpi.h, as it is needed
for phys_cpuid_t for ARM64. this is already discussed
here:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/30/311
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
