From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: <x86@kernel.org>, <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, <len.brown@intel.com>, <pavel@ucw.cz>,
<tglx@linutronix.de>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/2] x86/acpi: Cleanup acpi_process_madt()
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 09:32:38 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200123013238.19059-3-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200123013238.19059-1-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
After many duct-taped patches, the readablity of these code chunks are
really hard. This patch does following improvements:
1. Drop unnecessary comment that is self-documented by function name,
while supply with necessary comments.
2. Drop duplicated code: acpi_process_madt() has already been called
in early madt processing, acpi_lapic & smp_found_config is also
initialized there.
3. Fix code logic: variable count's usage is quite confusing now, and
some code logic is wrong, like count & x2count will never be negative
after assigned from madt_proc[n].count
Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 44 +++++++++++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
index 2131035bba98..844fc9f26064 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
@@ -1026,9 +1026,10 @@ static int __init early_acpi_parse_madt_lapic_addr_ovr(void)
return count;
}
+/* Returns 0 on success, < 0 on error. */
static int __init acpi_parse_madt_lapic_entries(void)
{
- int count;
+ int count = 0;
int x2count = 0;
int ret;
struct acpi_subtable_proc madt_proc[2];
@@ -1036,10 +1037,13 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_madt_lapic_entries(void)
if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_APIC))
return -ENODEV;
- count = acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_SAPIC,
- acpi_parse_sapic, MAX_LOCAL_APIC);
+ /* SAPIC is commonly found on Intel Itanium processor. */
+ ret = acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_SAPIC,
+ acpi_parse_sapic, MAX_LOCAL_APIC);
- if (!count) {
+
+ /* No SAPIC entries implies it is not Itanium processor. */
+ if (!ret) {
memset(madt_proc, 0, sizeof(madt_proc));
madt_proc[0].id = ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_APIC;
madt_proc[0].handler = acpi_parse_lapic;
@@ -1056,15 +1060,14 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_madt_lapic_entries(void)
count = madt_proc[0].count;
x2count = madt_proc[1].count;
- }
- if (!count && !x2count) {
- printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "No LAPIC entries present\n");
- /* TBD: Cleanup to allow fallback to MPS */
- return -ENODEV;
- } else if (count < 0 || x2count < 0) {
- printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "Error parsing LAPIC entry\n");
- /* TBD: Cleanup to allow fallback to MPS */
- return count;
+ if (!count && !x2count) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "No LAPIC entries present\n");
+ /* TBD: Cleanup to allow fallback to MPS */
+ return -ENODEV;
+ }
+ } else if (ret < 0) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "Error parsing SAPIC entries\n");
+ return ret;
}
x2count = acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_X2APIC_NMI,
@@ -1074,7 +1077,7 @@ static int __init acpi_parse_madt_lapic_entries(void)
if (count < 0 || x2count < 0) {
printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "Error parsing LAPIC NMI entry\n");
/* TBD: Cleanup to allow fallback to MPS */
- return count;
+ return (count < 0) ? count : x2count;
}
return 0;
}
@@ -1255,25 +1258,14 @@ static void __init acpi_process_madt(void)
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
int error;
- if (!acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_MADT, acpi_parse_madt)) {
-
- /*
- * Parse MADT LAPIC entries
- */
+ if (acpi_lapic) {
error = acpi_parse_madt_lapic_entries();
if (!error) {
- acpi_lapic = 1;
-
- /*
- * Parse MADT IO-APIC entries
- */
mutex_lock(&acpi_ioapic_lock);
error = acpi_parse_madt_ioapic_entries();
mutex_unlock(&acpi_ioapic_lock);
if (!error) {
acpi_set_irq_model_ioapic();
-
- smp_found_config = 1;
}
}
if (error == -EINVAL) {
--
2.21.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-23 1:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-23 1:32 [RFC PATCH 0/2] x86/boot: early ACPI MADT processing cleanup Cao jin
2020-01-23 1:32 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] x86/acpi: Improve code readablity of early madt processing Cao jin
2020-01-23 1:32 ` Cao jin [this message]
2020-01-23 1:43 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] x86/boot: early ACPI MADT processing cleanup Cao jin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-01-23 1:41 Cao jin
2020-01-23 1:41 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] x86/acpi: Cleanup acpi_process_madt() Cao jin
2020-01-22 3:47 [RFC PATCH 0/2] x86/boot: early ACPI MADT processing cleanup Cao jin
2020-01-22 3:47 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] x86/acpi: Cleanup acpi_process_madt() 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=20200123013238.19059-3-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--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).