Re: [RFC PATCH v2 15/35] ACPI: processor: Add support for processors described as container packages

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

 



On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 02:53:53PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 16:38:03 +0000
> James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > ACPI has two ways of describing processors in the DSDT. Either as a device
> > object with HID ACPI0007, or as a type 'C' package inside a Processor
> > Container. The ACPI processor driver probes CPUs described as devices, but
> > not those described as packages.
> > 
> 
> Specification reference needed...
> 
> Terminology wise, I'd just refer to Processor() objects as I think they
> are named objects rather than data terms like a package (Which include
> a PkgLength etc)

I'm not sure what kind of reference you want for the above. Looking in
ACPI 6.5, I've found in 5.2.12:

"Starting with ACPI Specification 6.3, the use of the Processor() object
was deprecated. Only legacy systems should continue with this usage. On
the Itanium architecture only, a _UID is provided for the Processor()
that is a string object. This usage of _UID is also deprecated since it
can preclude an OSPM from being able to match a processor to a
non-enumerable device, such as those defined in the MADT. From ACPI
Specification 6.3 onward, all processor objects for all architectures
except Itanium must now use Device() objects with an _HID of ACPI0007,
and use only integer _UID values."

Also, there is:

https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/08_Processor_Configuration_and_Control.html#declaring-processors

Unfortunately, using the search facility on that site to try and find
Processor() doesn't work - it appears to strip the "()" characters from
the search (which is completely dumb, why do search facilities do that?)

> > The missing probe for CPUs described as packages creates a problem for
> > moving the cpu_register() calls into the acpi_processor driver, as CPUs
> > described like this don't get registered, leading to errors from other
> > subsystems when they try to add new sysfs entries to the CPU node.
> > (e.g. topology_sysfs_init()'s use of topology_add_dev() via cpuhp)
> > 
> > To fix this, parse the processor container and call acpi_processor_add()
> > for each processor that is discovered like this. The processor container
> > handler is added with acpi_scan_add_handler(), so no detach call will
> > arrive.
> > 
> > Qemu TCG describes CPUs using packages in a processor container.
> 
> processor terms in a processor container. 

Are you wanting this to be:

"Qemu TCG describes CPUs using processor terms in a processor
container."

? Searching the ACPI spec for "processor terms" (with or without quotes)
only brings up results for "terms" - yet another reason to hate site-
provided search facilities, I don't know why sites bother. :(

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux