Currently we use the ACPI processor ID only for the leaf/processor nodes
as the specification states it must match the value of ACPI processor ID
field in the processor’s entry in the MADT.
However, if a PPTT structure represents processors group, it match a
processor container UID in the namespace and ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID
flag describe whether the ACPI processor ID is valid.
Lets use UID whenever ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID is set to be
consistent instead of using table offset as it's currently done for non
leaf nodes.
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <r...@rjwysocki.net>
Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com>
---
drivers/acpi/pptt.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi,
There's ongoing discussion on assigning ID based in OS using simple
counters. It can never be consistent with firmware's view. So if the
firmware provides valid UID for non-processors node, we must use it.
Regards,
Sudeep
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
index e5ea1974d1e3..d1e26cb599bf 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
@@ -481,8 +481,14 @@ static int topology_get_acpi_cpu_tag(struct
acpi_table_header *table,
if (cpu_node) {
cpu_node = acpi_find_processor_package_id(table, cpu_node,
level, flag);
- /* Only the first level has a guaranteed id */
- if (level == 0)
+ /*
+ * As per specification if the processor structure represents
+ * an actual processor, then ACPI processor ID must be valid.
+ * For processor containers ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID
+ * should be set if the UID is valid
+ */
+ if (level == 0 ||
+ cpu_node->flags & ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID)
return cpu_node->acpi_processor_id;
return ACPI_PTR_DIFF(cpu_node, table);
}
--
2.7.4
