On 2017/2/16 18:38, Dou Liyang wrote:
In ACPI spec, we can declare processors using both Processor and
Device operator. But now, we just handle the mapping of processors
which are declared by Processor operator.
It misses the processors declared by Device operator.
The patch adds this case of the Device operator.
Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
index 611a558..1aab5b0 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
@@ -344,8 +344,10 @@ void __init acpi_set_processor_mapping(void)
{
/* Set persistent cpu <-> node mapping for all processors. */
acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_PROCESSOR, ACPI_ROOT_OBJECT,
- ACPI_UINT32_MAX, set_processor_node_mapping,
- NULL, NULL, NULL);
+ ACPI_UINT32_MAX, set_processor_node_mapping,
+ NULL, NULL, NULL);
no need to update the code above.
+ acpi_get_devices(ACPI_PROCESSOR_DEVICE_HID, set_processor_node_mapping,
+ NULL, NULL);
It makes sense to me to add support for Processor devices of setting
persistent cpu <-> node mapping, but I just wondering if there is no
Processor device or Processor Operator for a processor entry(such as
local apic, the spec didn't say it's a mandatory) in MADT, how do we
set the mappings?
BTW, multi places in the ACPI driver are using the same pattern here
to scan all the processors, maybe we can add a function then call it
to reduce some lines of code?
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
