On 2015/3/26 1:21, Catalin Marinas wrote:

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:02:46PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:

quoted

CPU hardware ID (phys_id) is defined as u32 in structure acpi_processor,
but phys_id is used as int in acpi processor driver, so it will lead to
some inconsistence for the drivers.

Furthermore, to cater for ACPI arch ports that implement 64 bits CPU
ids a generic CPU physical id type is required.

So introduce typedef u32 phys_cpuid_t in a common file, and introduce
a macro PHYS_CPUID_INVALID as (phys_cpuid_t)(-1) if it's not defined
by other archs, this will solve the inconsistence in acpi processor driver,
and will prepare for the ACPI on ARM64 for the 64 bit CPU hardware ID
in the following patch.

CC: Rafael J Wysocki <redacted>
Suggested-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Grant Likely <redacted>
Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <redacted>
Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <redacted>
Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
[hj: reworked cpu physid map return codes]
Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <redacted>

BTW, am I still the author of this patch? If yes, it's missing a From:
line.

Oops, you should be the author, can Will fix this in his tree?

quoted

--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c

@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 	acpi_status status;
 	int ret;
 
-	if (pr->phys_id == -1)
+	if (pr->phys_id == PHYS_CPUID_INVALID)
 		return -ENODEV;

If PHYS_CPUID_INVALID is the same as INVALID_HWID, we should get rid of
the latter in the arm64 code (as a subsequent clean-up patch).

OK, I'm preparing a patch set to introduce invalid_phys_cpuid() and invalid_logical_cpuid()
to remove the direct comparison of PHYS_CPUID_INVALID and -1 in ACPI processor drivers,
which is suggested by Rafael, I will cleanup PHYS_CPUID_INVALID in this patch set.

Thanks
Hanjun