On 2014年07月08日 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