Hi,
On 04/26/2018 06:05 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 26/04/18 00:31, Jeremy Linton wrote:
Call ACPI cache parsing routines from base cacheinfo code if ACPI
is enable. Also stub out cache_setup_acpi() so that individual
architectures can enable ACPI topology parsing.
[...]
+#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI
+static inline int acpi_find_last_cache_level(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ /* ACPI kernels should be built with PPTT support */
This sounds incorrect for x86. But I understand why you have it there.
Does it makes sense to change above to .. ?
#if !defined(CONFIG_ACPI) || (defined(CONFIG_ACPI) && !(CONFIG_ACPI_PPTT))
I'm not sure what that buys us, if anything you want more non-users of
the function to be falling through to the function prototype rather than
the static inline. The only place any of this matters (as long as the
compiler/linker is tossing the static inline) is arm64 because its the
only arch making a call to acpi_find_last_cache_level(). ACPI_PPTT is
also only visible on arm64 at the moment due to being wrapped in a if
ARM64 in the Kconfig
Put another way, I wouldn't expect an arch to have a 'user' visible
option to enable/disable parsing the PPTT. If an arch can handle
ACPI/PPTT topology then I would expect it to be fixed to the CONFIG_ACPI
state. What happens when acpi_find_last_cache_level() is called should
only be dependent on whether ACPI is enabled, the PPTT parser itself
will handle the cases of a missing table.
--
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
