Re: [PATCH 09/33] ACPI / MPAM: Parse the MPAM table

[Fenghua Yu]

Hi, Ben and James,

On 11/7/25 04:34, Ben Horgan wrote:
> From: James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx>

[SNIP]

> +static int acpi_mpam_parse_resource(struct mpam_msc *msc,
> +				    struct acpi_mpam_resource_node *res)
> +{
> +	int level, nid;
> +	u32 cache_id;
> +
> +	switch (res->locator_type) {
> +	case ACPI_MPAM_LOCATION_TYPE_PROCESSOR_CACHE:
> +		cache_id = res->locator.cache_locator.cache_reference;
> +		level = find_acpi_cache_level_from_id(cache_id);
> +		if (level <= 0) {
> +			pr_err_once("Bad level (%d) for cache with id %u\n", level, cache_id);
> +			return -EINVAL;
> +		}
> +		return mpam_ris_create(msc, res->ris_index, MPAM_CLASS_CACHE,
> +				       level, cache_id);
> +	case ACPI_MPAM_LOCATION_TYPE_MEMORY:
> +		nid = pxm_to_node(res->locator.memory_locator.proximity_domain);
> +		if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
> +			pr_debug("Bad proxmity domain %lld, using node 0 instead\n",
> +				 res->locator.memory_locator.proximity_domain);
> +			nid = 0;
> +		}
> +		return mpam_ris_create(msc, res->ris_index, MPAM_CLASS_MEMORY,
> +				       255, nid);

nit.

Seems "255" is an ad-hoc value which won't be used for memory type?
The "class_id" in mpam_ris_create() is confused: it may be level for 
cache or it may be 255 for memory.

To be clearer, maybe it's better to define and enum for class_id? 
Something like:
enum mpam_class_id {
	CLASS_ID_LEVEL_1 = 1,
	CLASS_ID_LEVEL_2,
	CLASS_ID_LEVEL_3,
	CLASS_ID_NOT_USED = 255  <--- for memory type
};

Thanks.

-Fenghua