[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cb5ba93f-fd0b-3858-b801-2546d821a637@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 14:34:02 -0500
From: "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@....com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@...cle.com>
Cc: rafael@...nel.org, lenb@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvijayab@....com,
miguel.luis@...cle.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/acpi: acpi_is_processor_usable() dropping
possible cpus
On 3/27/2023 15:25, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 03:07:23PM -0500, Eric DeVolder wrote:
>> https://ueif.org/sites/default/files/resources/ACPI_6_3_May16.pdf
>> Section 5.2.12 MADT. Table 5-43 is the MADT Revision is numbered 5.
>> However, ACPI 6.x specs got a little "sloppy" with Revision,
>
> Yes, I've found what you're pointing out too. But exactly because of
> this sloppiness I'd like to see this more explicitly. Because we're
> basing functionality off of it and it is not some meaningless
> paperweight anymore.
>
Boris and I talked offline and got the situation clarified.
The corrected patch for MADT version handling is sent here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20230329174536.6931-1-mario.limonciello@amd.com/T/#u
Eric - Your patch is still needed though.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists