[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZUTOwuZVLvzptuuP@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2023 10:43:14 +0000
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
x86@...nel.org, Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
jianyong.wu@....com, justin.he@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 15/35] ACPI: processor: Add support for processors
described as container packages
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 02:53:53PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 16:38:03 +0000
> James Morse <james.morse@....com> wrote:
>
> > ACPI has two ways of describing processors in the DSDT. Either as a device
> > object with HID ACPI0007, or as a type 'C' package inside a Processor
> > Container. The ACPI processor driver probes CPUs described as devices, but
> > not those described as packages.
> >
>
> Specification reference needed...
>
> Terminology wise, I'd just refer to Processor() objects as I think they
> are named objects rather than data terms like a package (Which include
> a PkgLength etc)
I'm not sure what kind of reference you want for the above. Looking in
ACPI 6.5, I've found in 5.2.12:
"Starting with ACPI Specification 6.3, the use of the Processor() object
was deprecated. Only legacy systems should continue with this usage. On
the Itanium architecture only, a _UID is provided for the Processor()
that is a string object. This usage of _UID is also deprecated since it
can preclude an OSPM from being able to match a processor to a
non-enumerable device, such as those defined in the MADT. From ACPI
Specification 6.3 onward, all processor objects for all architectures
except Itanium must now use Device() objects with an _HID of ACPI0007,
and use only integer _UID values."
Also, there is:
https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/08_Processor_Configuration_and_Control.html#declaring-processors
Unfortunately, using the search facility on that site to try and find
Processor() doesn't work - it appears to strip the "()" characters from
the search (which is completely dumb, why do search facilities do that?)
> > The missing probe for CPUs described as packages creates a problem for
> > moving the cpu_register() calls into the acpi_processor driver, as CPUs
> > described like this don't get registered, leading to errors from other
> > subsystems when they try to add new sysfs entries to the CPU node.
> > (e.g. topology_sysfs_init()'s use of topology_add_dev() via cpuhp)
> >
> > To fix this, parse the processor container and call acpi_processor_add()
> > for each processor that is discovered like this. The processor container
> > handler is added with acpi_scan_add_handler(), so no detach call will
> > arrive.
> >
> > Qemu TCG describes CPUs using packages in a processor container.
>
> processor terms in a processor container.
Are you wanting this to be:
"Qemu TCG describes CPUs using processor terms in a processor
container."
? Searching the ACPI spec for "processor terms" (with or without quotes)
only brings up results for "terms" - yet another reason to hate site-
provided search facilities, I don't know why sites bother. :(
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists