From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754667AbbCEIEX (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2015 03:04:23 -0500 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([58.251.152.64]:28190 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754486AbbCEIEV (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2015 03:04:21 -0500 Message-ID: <54F80DC9.3090808@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 16:03:21 +0800 From: Hanjun Guo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Hanjun Guo CC: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Olof Johansson , Grant Likely , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Arnd Bergmann , Mark Rutland , "Graeme Gregory" , Sudeep Holla , "Jon Masters" , Marc Zyngier , Mark Brown , Robert Richter , Timur Tabi , Ashwin Chaugule , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 14/21] ACPI / processor: Make it possible to get CPU hardware ID via GICC References: <1424853601-6675-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <1424853601-6675-15-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <2411054.s4TkmAUKjT@vostro.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <2411054.s4TkmAUKjT@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.177.17.188] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2015/3/5 6:46, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 04:39:54 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: >> Introduce a new function map_gicc_mpidr() to allow MPIDRs to be obtained >> from the GICC Structure introduced by ACPI 5.1. >> >> The ARM architecture defines the MPIDR register as the CPU hardware >> identifier. This patch adds the code infrastructure to retrieve the MPIDR >> values from the ARM ACPI GICC structure in order to look-up the kernel CPU >> hardware ids required by the ACPI core code to identify CPUs. >> >> CC: Rafael J. Wysocki >> CC: Catalin Marinas >> CC: Will Deacon >> Tested-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit >> Tested-by: Yijing Wang >> Tested-by: Mark Langsdorf >> Tested-by: Jon Masters >> Tested-by: Timur Tabi >> Tested-by: Robert Richter >> Acked-by: Robert Richter >> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo >> --- >> arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h | 12 ++++++++++++ >> drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >> index 9719921..9a23369 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >> @@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ >> #define _ASM_ACPI_H >> >> #include >> +#include >> +#include >> >> /* Basic configuration for ACPI */ >> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI >> @@ -27,6 +29,9 @@ static inline void __iomem *acpi_os_ioremap(acpi_physical_address phys, >> } >> #define acpi_os_ioremap acpi_os_ioremap >> >> +typedef u64 phys_cpuid_t; >> +#define CPU_PHYS_ID_INVALID INVALID_HWID >> + > Any chance to combine this with patch [2/21]? Or at least put them next to each > other in the series so as to indicate that they are related or *mention* patch > [2/21] in the changelog here? Both are ok to me. I separated those two patches for the assumption that you will merge the first two patches in your tree, I will put them next to each other. > > IMO, you really need to define phys_cpuid_t in a common place or people will > forget that it may be 64-bit, because they'll only be looking at their arch. Since x86 and ARM64 are using different types for phys_cpuid_t, we need to introduce something like following if define it in common place: in linux/acpi.h, #if defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined(CONFIG_IA64) typedef u32 phys_cpuid_t; #define PHYS_CPUID_INVALID (phys_cpuid_t)(-1) #else if defined(CONFIG_ARM64) typedef u64 phys_cpuid_t; #define PHYS_CPUID_INVALID INVALID_HWID #endif I think it's awful, did I miss something? Thanks Hanjun