On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 2:04 AM Tao Xu <tao3.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 12/9/2019 6:01 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 8:03 AM Tao Xu <tao3.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> In chapter 5.2.27.5, Table 5-147: Field "Cache Attributes" of > >> ACPI 6.3 spec: 0 is "None", 1 is "Direct Mapped", 2 is "Complex Cache > >> Indexing" for Cache Associativity; 0 is "None", 1 is "Write Back", > >> 2 is "Write Through" for Write Policy. > > > > Well, I'm not sure what the connection between the above statement, > > which is correct AFAICS, and the changes made by the patch is. > > > > Is that the *_OTHER symbol names are confusing or something deeper? > > > > Because in include/acpi/actbl1.h: > > #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_NONE (0) > > ACPI_HMAT_CA_NONE is 0, but in include/linux/node.h: > > enum cache_indexing { > NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP, > NODE_CACHE_INDEXED, > NODE_CACHE_OTHER, > }; > NODE_CACHE_OTHER is 2, and for otner enum: > > case ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED: > tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP; > break; > case ACPI_HMAT_CA_COMPLEX_CACHE_INDEXING: > tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_INDEXED; > break; > in include/acpi/actbl1.h: > > #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED (1) > #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_COMPLEX_CACHE_INDEXING (2) > > but in include/linux/node.h: > > NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP is 0, NODE_CACHE_INDEXED is 1. This is incorrect. Why is it incorrect? > And same for enum cache_write_policy.