linux/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c, branch v5.7

ACPI: processor: Export acpi_processor_evaluate_cst()

2019-12-27T10:02:07Z

The intel_idle driver will be modified to use ACPI _CST subsequently and it will need to call acpi_processor_evaluate_cst(), so move that function to acpi_processor.c so that it is always present (which is required by intel_idle) and export it to modules to allow the ACPI processor driver (which is modular) to call it. No intentional functional impact. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

ACPI: processor: Export function to claim _CST control

2019-12-16T11:06:18Z

The intel_idle driver will be modified to use ACPI _CST subsequently and it will need to notify the platform firmware of that if acpi_gbl_FADT.cst_control is set, so add a routine for this purpose, acpi_processor_claim_cst_control(), to acpi_processor.c (so that it is always present which is required by intel_idle) and export it to allow the ACPI processor driver (which is modular) to call it. No intentional functional impact. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

ACPI / processor: don't print errors for processorIDs == 0xff

2019-08-09T08:48:34Z

Some platforms define their processors in this manner: Device (SCK0) { Name (_HID, "ACPI0004" /* Module Device */) // _HID: Hardware ID Name (_UID, "CPUSCK0") // _UID: Unique ID Processor (CP00, 0x00, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP01, 0x02, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP02, 0x04, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP03, 0x06, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP04, 0x01, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP05, 0x03, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP06, 0x05, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP07, 0x07, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP08, 0xFF, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP09, 0xFF, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP0A, 0xFF, 0x00000410, 0x06){} Processor (CP0B, 0xFF, 0x00000410, 0x06){} ... The processors marked as 0xff are invalid, there are only 8 of them in this case. So do not print an error on ids == 0xff, just print an info message. Actually, we could return ENODEV even on the first CPU with ID 0xff, but ACPI spec does not forbid the 0xff value to be a processor ID. Given 0xff could be a correct one, we would break working systems if we returned ENODEV. Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

treewide: Replace GPLv2 boilerplate/reference with SPDX - rule 500

2019-06-19T15:09:55Z

Based on 2 normalized pattern(s): this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify it under the terms of the gnu general public license version 2 as published by the free software foundation this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify it under the terms of the gnu general public license version 2 as published by the free software foundation # extracted by the scancode license scanner the SPDX license identifier GPL-2.0-only has been chosen to replace the boilerplate/reference in 4122 file(s). Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Reviewed-by: Enrico Weigelt Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart Reviewed-by: Allison Randal Cc: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190604081206.933168790@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

ACPI / processor: Fix the return value of acpi_processor_ids_walk()

2018-10-04T06:58:32Z

ACPI driver should make sure all the processor IDs in their ACPI Namespace are unique. the driver performs a depth-first walk of the namespace tree and calls the acpi_processor_ids_walk() to check the duplicate IDs. But, the acpi_processor_ids_walk() mistakes the return value. If a processor is checked, it returns true which causes the walk break immediately, and other processors will never be checked. Repace the value with AE_OK which is the standard acpi_status value. And don't abort the namespace walk even on error. Fixes: 8c8cb30f49b8 (acpi/processor: Implement DEVICE operator for processor enumeration) Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

ACPI: Mark expected switch fall-throughs

2017-11-08T23:55:16Z

In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

ACPI / processor: make function acpi_processor_check_duplicates() static

2017-08-24T01:25:47Z

The function acpi_processor_check_duplicates() is local to the source and does not need to be in global scope, so make it static. Cleans up sparse warnings: symbol 'acpi_processor_check_duplicates' was not declared. Should it be static? Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

ACPI / Processor: Drop setup_max_cpus check from acpi_processor_add()

2017-04-18T14:50:24Z

When maxcpus=X kernel argument is used, we parse the ACPI tables only for the first X cpus. The per-cpu ACPI data include the _PSD tables which gives information about related cpus. cppc_cpufreq and acpi-cpufreq parses the table once during init to deduce the related cpus. If a user brings a new cpu online after boot the related cpu data becomes incorrect. acpi_get_psd_map() in acpi_cppc.c returns error if it fails to find the parsed ACPI data for possible CPU resulting in cppc_cpufreq initialization failure. With this change we will probe all possible CPUs prior to cpufreq initialization, but will bring only setup_max_cpus online. nr_cpus kernel parameter can be used to restict even parsing per-cpu ACPI tables. Signed-off-by: Prashanth Prakash [ rjw: Subject ] Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki

acpi/processor: Check for duplicate processor ids at hotplug time

2017-03-11T13:41:20Z

The check for duplicate processor ids happens at boot time based on the ACPI table contents, but the final sanity checks for a processor happen at hotplug time. At hotplug time, where the physical information is available, which might differ from the ACPI table information, a check for duplicate processor ids is missing. Add it to the hotplug checks and rename the function so it better reflects its purpose. Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang Tested-by: Xiaolong Ye Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Cc: guzheng1@huawei.com Cc: izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com Cc: lenb@kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1488528147-2279-6-git-send-email-douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner

acpi/processor: Implement DEVICE operator for processor enumeration

2017-03-11T13:41:20Z

ACPI allows to declare processors either with the PROCESSOR or with the DEVICE operator. The current implementation handles only the PROCESSOR operator. On a system which uses the DEVICE operator for processor enumeration the evaluation fails. Check for the ACPI type of the ACPI handle and evaluate PROCESSOR and DEVICE types separately. Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang Tested-by: Xiaolong Ye Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Cc: guzheng1@huawei.com Cc: izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com Cc: lenb@kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1488528147-2279-5-git-send-email-douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner