[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <554CD711.3090903@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 16:32:33 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"hanjun.guo@...aro.org" <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
CC: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"ahs3@...hat.com" <ahs3@...hat.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/5] ACPI / containers : add support for ACPI0010
processor container
On 08/05/15 15:06, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, May 08, 2015 04:50:10 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> Hi Sudeep,
>>
>> On 2015年05月06日 22:31, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> ACPI 6.0 adds support for optional processor container device which may
>>> contain child objects that are either processor devices or other processor
>>> containers. This allows representing hierarchical processor topologies.
>>>
>>> It is declared using the _HID of ACPI0010. It may also have _CID of
>>> PNP0A05, which represents a generic container device.
>>
>> Container device helps support hotplug of nodes, CPUs, and memory,
>> does this container device ACPI0010 used for the same purpose?
>
> That's correct and the patch isn't.
>
Thanks Rafael for the clarification.
Just curious if the firmware adds _CID of PNP0A05 to support OS that
don't parse processor containers, will the current code not create
containers using _CID ?
Regards,
Sudeep
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists