From patchwork Fri Jun 29 16:17:57 2018 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Sudeep Holla X-Patchwork-Id: 140629 Delivered-To: patch@linaro.org Received: by 2002:a2e:9754:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id f20-v6csp1042457ljj; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 09:18:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJGfqrzE5Wi1gM9Ff0U2UL6edhVzqXI0XENJ8ODdq9XFrdwELot1ymNw4w+ZlawAIp5b2n+ X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:600d:: with SMTP id r13-v6mr15668222plj.70.1530289087812; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 09:18:07 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1530289087; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=j5FFN1pRhoiq+3DIe6R1UUUp2+LOmausm3IncyajLMmg+vLpHjOGGn0TDEGyw97lkM WQ17SevV3fjnSmbnIkFMc9U4P0kP5v3pcTRBRfcWvb5vVCPD1lygleH8rsXJjhRk2MtW ttJq+Spp/2dnIHpU/rZqAaYTXmWsOdE1A6s1yPeU625G+TElIQ5VrLG27ezusI4Wicvj hISweojYovekSnk4Jzzly2Dko/diPpqMmPdtbmoJPFERi+YXGf53rRQjwnUGXuPnKVED Rkn3SDLubbbZtbUeq5MD3oOexGSQ+z7lw/lyI6gYRzEMc1fKh/rlvQ0dAJ+OU43BKE4l Mv3g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:arc-authentication-results; bh=g0zpO9jNOVwZpM3KGr24xKmZA6qs+hIJIX6BWDamHd8=; b=MsgdRRCCD1yYX/7M1HmzzhHKTYUod86lk67qU3jKNKJPnDDDl9/UjWELYlfUZ60Lar ldf/kO5IKI/UPU6Js+OtTEOxUM1UMyJ3WHQ7AhubgMS5ujCDy2ZKf2dV4Vdt9jApoQrb L2+mjwv2f5PancQI9LqKIV5h6hmciG+Y54IKPZGTazg0ZLXw4rpIhM4XX3NlQX3MD0v6 gaOsIjIOFMJAvBaMTld5ltzWHWKeds+Xv0Q3WorAJnzchy7yFbEn3j+s9Ns2rlmgkckZ ioz4+ITRnGKg04uZOO5qdcqsgahNsLWeLplA8Hi9TUurCr/cL0obmudXJrgsSmUShOd3 gOzQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v2-v6si1710096pgq.142.2018.06.29.09.18.07; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 09:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936670AbeF2QSG (ORCPT + 9 others); Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:18:06 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:36712 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936665AbeF2QSG (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jun 2018 12:18:06 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4A7D18A; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 09:18:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usa.arm.com (unknown [10.1.210.28]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B316C3F266; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 09:18:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Sudeep Holla To: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Jeremy Linton , shunyong.yang@hxt-semitech.com, yu.zheng@hxt-semitech.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, Lorenzo Pieralisi , Andrew Jones , Sudeep Holla , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: [PATCH] ACPI/PPTT: use ACPI ID whenever ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID is set Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:17:57 +0100 Message-Id: <1530289077-2444-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.7.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org 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" Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla --- 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 -- 2.7.4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Acked-by: Jeremy Linton 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); }