From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Cc: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>,
"Guohanjun (Hanjun Guo)" <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"liuqi (BA)" <liuqi115@huawei.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Subject: Re: About PPTT find_acpi_cpu_topology_package()
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 15:36:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200212153633.GD36981@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0edb6aa9-c96f-71c1-a3ab-a95df4c07317@arm.com>
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 12:49:17PM -0600, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2/12/20 7:55 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 12:48:33PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> > > On 12/02/2020 11:59, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > Yes, as mentioned above. We are not going to do extra work for lazy firmware.
> > >
> > > I don't think it's reasonable to just label this as lazy. The table may just
> > > not have the flag set unintentionally. FW and software guys make mistakes,
> > > like the mistakes in PPTT, itself.
> > >
> >
> > We are not talking about flags, it's UID and it is pretty important if
> > there are more than one objects of same time.
>
> But, this hints at my reservations with this approach. If you wanted to have
> your processors numbered 0...x and your sockets numbered 0...y, there could
> be overlap in the processor container objects, which should also be avoided.
>
Of course yes, UID needs to be unique at a given processor/container level.
Yes, it's more restricted in that way compared to objects of similar type.
Here they are all same processor containers, but need to enumerate from 0
at each level.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-12 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-12 11:20 About PPTT find_acpi_cpu_topology_package() John Garry
2020-02-12 11:59 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-02-12 12:48 ` John Garry
2020-02-12 13:55 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-02-11 18:49 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-02-12 15:36 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2020-02-12 14:41 ` John Garry
2020-02-11 19:01 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-03-25 11:43 ` John Garry
2020-02-11 19:31 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-02-12 16:41 ` John Garry
2020-02-11 21:12 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-02-13 11:52 ` John Garry
2020-02-13 14:00 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-02-13 14:33 ` John Garry
2020-02-13 16:52 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-02-14 10:35 ` John Garry
2020-02-14 11:22 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-02-12 15:32 ` Sudeep Holla
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200212153633.GD36981@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuqi115@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).