Re: [PATCH] ACPI/PPTT: use ACPI ID whenever ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID is set

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On 06/29/2018 11:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Currently we use the ACPI processor ID only for the leaf/processor nodes
as the specification states it must match the value of ACPI processor ID
field in the processor’s entry in the MADT.

However, if a PPTT structure represents processors group, it match a
processor container UID in the namespace and ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID
flag describe whether the ACPI processor ID is valid.

Lets use UID whenever ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID is set to be
consistent instead of using table offset as it's currently done for non
leaf nodes.

Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/acpi/pptt.c | 10 ++++++++--
  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Hi,

There's ongoing discussion on assigning ID based in OS using simple
counters. It can never be consistent with firmware's view. So if the
firmware provides valid UID for non-processors node, we must use it.

Regards,
Sudeep

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
index e5ea1974d1e3..d1e26cb599bf 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
@@ -481,8 +481,14 @@ static int topology_get_acpi_cpu_tag(struct acpi_table_header *table,
  	if (cpu_node) {
  		cpu_node = acpi_find_processor_package_id(table, cpu_node,
  							  level, flag);
-		/* Only the first level has a guaranteed id */
-		if (level == 0)
+		/*
+		 * As per specification if the processor structure represents
+		 * an actual processor, then ACPI processor ID must be valid.
+		 * For processor containers ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID
+		 * should be set if the UID is valid
+		 */
+		if (level == 0 ||
+		    cpu_node->flags & ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID)
  			return cpu_node->acpi_processor_id;
  		return ACPI_PTR_DIFF(cpu_node, table);
  	}


Ok sure,

Acked-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@xxxxxxx>


PS: To table implementers, the spec today mandates that setting the valid flag on a non leaf node means there is a matching _UID processor container in DSDT/SSDT.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux