Re: [PATCH] x86, acpi: Handle lapic/x2apic entries in MADT
From: Lukasz Anaczkowski
Date: Wed Aug 26 2015 - 13:49:40 EST
Marc nad Lorenzo,
First of all appologies for breaking arm64 (again) and thank you for
debugging effort. I own you.
> - count is only incremented when max_entries != 0, as you noticed
You are right, sorry for that, it's fixed in v3.
> - With max_entries != 0, count now represent the sum of all matches
> Is that expected?
I have no strong opinion on that one. All of the x86 ACPI entries
handling only checks for count < 0, or uses count from the
acpi_subtable_proc structure (and that's why I didn't noticed the
mainline breakage).
If you think it's not correct or less usable than other approach,
let me know.
> - The proc iteration stops after the first match. Why?
So, the initial implementation of the acpi_parse_entries accepted
single handler for the ACPI table. Now, with this change, assumption
is that different handlers for different tables/subtables are passed,
meaning only one can meet entry->type == proc[i].id condition.
mainline breakage). This approach saves one local varaible, but
I don't think this is ultimate argument :)
> - The test for max_entries is done inside the proc loop. Why?
That's obviously wrong in context of the overall wrong counting.
> [...] this should be documented and agreed upon.
I've added description with assumptions. Again, if you think it's
not correct, let me know.
Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> should acpi_table_parse_entries suppose to be removed above?
Thanks for pointing this out. I've missed implementation of
acpi_table_parse_entries when was backporting initial patch.
I've added it back.
Cheers,
Lukasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/