| Message ID | 1404290847-7671-3-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wednesday, July 02, 2014 04:47:24 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: > From: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org> > > Now ARM64 support is being added to ACPI so architecture specific > values can not be used in core ACPI code. > > Following on the patch "ACPI / processor: Check if LAPIC is present > during initialization" which uses acpi_lapic in acpi_processor.c, > on ARM64 platform, GIC is used instead of local APIC, so acpi_lapic > is not a suitable value for ARM64. > > What is actually important at this point is the SMPness of the system, > so introduce acpi_arch_is_smp() to be arch specific and generic. > > Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> > --- > arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h | 5 +++++ > arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h | 5 +++++ > drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 2 +- > 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h > index 75dc59a..2fc0757 100644 > --- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h > +++ b/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h > @@ -40,6 +40,11 @@ extern int acpi_lapic; > #define acpi_noirq 0 /* ACPI always enabled on IA64 */ > #define acpi_pci_disabled 0 /* ACPI PCI always enabled on IA64 */ > #define acpi_strict 1 /* no ACPI spec workarounds on IA64 */ > + > +static inline bool acpi_arch_is_smp(void) Why this name? In particular, local APIC being present doesn't imply SMP. > +{ > + return acpi_lapic; Also return !!acpi_lapic; would be cleaner IMO. > +} > #endif > #define acpi_processor_cstate_check(x) (x) /* no idle limits on IA64 :) */ > static inline void disable_acpi(void) { } > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h > index e06225e..939d377 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h > @@ -121,6 +121,11 @@ static inline void arch_acpi_set_pdc_bits(u32 *buf) > buf[2] &= ~(ACPI_PDC_C_C2C3_FFH); > } > > +static inline bool acpi_arch_is_smp(void) > +{ > + return acpi_lapic; > +} > + > #else /* !CONFIG_ACPI */ > > #define acpi_lapic 0 > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c > index 1c08574..8622a0e 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c > @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device) > pr->apic_id = apic_id; > > cpu_index = acpi_map_cpuid(pr->apic_id, pr->acpi_id); > - if (!cpu0_initialized && !acpi_lapic) { > + if (!cpu0_initialized && !acpi_arch_is_smp()) { > cpu0_initialized = 1; > /* Handle UP system running SMP kernel, with no LAPIC in MADT */ > if ((cpu_index == -1) && (num_online_cpus() == 1)) >
On 2014?07?08? 05:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, July 02, 2014 04:47:24 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: >> From: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org> >> >> Now ARM64 support is being added to ACPI so architecture specific >> values can not be used in core ACPI code. >> >> Following on the patch "ACPI / processor: Check if LAPIC is present >> during initialization" which uses acpi_lapic in acpi_processor.c, >> on ARM64 platform, GIC is used instead of local APIC, so acpi_lapic >> is not a suitable value for ARM64. >> >> What is actually important at this point is the SMPness of the system, >> so introduce acpi_arch_is_smp() to be arch specific and generic. >> >> Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org> >> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> >> --- >> arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h | 5 +++++ >> arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h | 5 +++++ >> drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 2 +- >> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h >> index 75dc59a..2fc0757 100644 >> --- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h >> +++ b/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h >> @@ -40,6 +40,11 @@ extern int acpi_lapic; >> #define acpi_noirq 0 /* ACPI always enabled on IA64 */ >> #define acpi_pci_disabled 0 /* ACPI PCI always enabled on IA64 */ >> #define acpi_strict 1 /* no ACPI spec workarounds on IA64 */ >> + >> +static inline bool acpi_arch_is_smp(void) > Why this name? In particular, local APIC being present doesn't imply SMP. Hmm, agreed. How about acpi_has_cpu_in_madt()? As we know, Local APIC/SAPIC in MADT stands for CPU in the system, how about the function name above? > >> +{ >> + return acpi_lapic; > Also > > return !!acpi_lapic; > > would be cleaner IMO. > I will update it as you suggested. Thanks Hanjun
diff --git a/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h index 75dc59a..2fc0757 100644 --- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h +++ b/arch/ia64/include/asm/acpi.h @@ -40,6 +40,11 @@ extern int acpi_lapic; #define acpi_noirq 0 /* ACPI always enabled on IA64 */ #define acpi_pci_disabled 0 /* ACPI PCI always enabled on IA64 */ #define acpi_strict 1 /* no ACPI spec workarounds on IA64 */ + +static inline bool acpi_arch_is_smp(void) +{ + return acpi_lapic; +} #endif #define acpi_processor_cstate_check(x) (x) /* no idle limits on IA64 :) */ static inline void disable_acpi(void) { } diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h index e06225e..939d377 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h @@ -121,6 +121,11 @@ static inline void arch_acpi_set_pdc_bits(u32 *buf) buf[2] &= ~(ACPI_PDC_C_C2C3_FFH); } +static inline bool acpi_arch_is_smp(void) +{ + return acpi_lapic; +} + #else /* !CONFIG_ACPI */ #define acpi_lapic 0 diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c index 1c08574..8622a0e 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device *device) pr->apic_id = apic_id; cpu_index = acpi_map_cpuid(pr->apic_id, pr->acpi_id); - if (!cpu0_initialized && !acpi_lapic) { + if (!cpu0_initialized && !acpi_arch_is_smp()) { cpu0_initialized = 1; /* Handle UP system running SMP kernel, with no LAPIC in MADT */ if ((cpu_index == -1) && (num_online_cpus() == 1))