From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
rjw@rjwysocki.net, len.brown@intel.com, pavel@ucw.cz,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] x86/acpi: Improve code readablity of early madt processing
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 14:21:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200224132152.GB29318@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200123014144.19155-2-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 09:41:43AM +0800, Cao jin wrote:
> Current processing logic is confusing.
>
> Return value of early_acpi_parse_madt_lapic_addr_ovr() indicates error(< 0),
> parsed entry number(>= 0).
You mean, the count of table entries parsed successfully?
> So, it makes no sense to initialize acpi_lapic & smp_found_config
> seeing no override entry, instead, initialize them seeing MADT.
Err, that logical conclusion is not really clear to me - pls try
again with more detail. I kinda see what you mean by looking at
acpi_process_madt() but before I commit a change like that, I better
have the warm and fuzzy feeling that it is correct and properly
explained in its commit message.
So why did
cbf9bd603ab1 ("acpi: get boot_cpu_id as early for k8_scan_nodes")
do it this way? Was it wrong or why?
I'm very wary about touching ACPI parsing code for no good reason
because, well, it is ACPI...
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-24 13:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-23 1:41 [RFC PATCH 0/2] x86/boot: early ACPI MADT processing cleanup Cao jin
2020-01-23 1:41 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] x86/acpi: Improve code readablity of early madt processing Cao jin
2020-02-24 13:21 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2020-02-25 7:02 ` Cao jin
2020-03-16 9:20 ` Cao jin
2020-01-23 1:41 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] x86/acpi: Cleanup acpi_process_madt() Cao jin
2020-02-19 7:32 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] x86/boot: early ACPI MADT processing cleanup Cao jin
2020-03-27 12:30 ` Cao jin
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=20200224132152.GB29318@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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).