On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 08:36:46AM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2014-8-18 22:27, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 04:28:13PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h index 6e04868..e877967 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h @@ -64,6 +64,8 @@ static inline void arch_fix_phys_package_id(int num, u32 slot) { } extern int (*acpi_suspend_lowlevel)(void); #define acpi_wakeup_address 0 +#define MAX_GIC_CPU_INTERFACE 65535
Does this need to be more than NR_CPUS?
Sometimes yes, CPU structure entries in MADT just like CPU nodes in device tree, the number of them may more than NR_CPUS.
I have a more general question here. In ACPI, is MADT the only way to build a CPU topology? It looks weird that we use GIC properties to create the cpu_logical_map(). A side-effect is that the GIC-related functions are now scattered all over the kernel rather than being contained in the GIC driver itself.