lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Feb]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCHv8 17/17] ACPI: tables: Print MULTIPROC_WAKEUP when MADT is parsed
From


On 29/02/2024 4:22 am, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 11:08:38AM +1300, Huang, Kai wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28/02/2024 10:24 am, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>> When MADT is parsed, print MULTIPROC_WAKEUP information:
>>>
>>> ACPI: MP Wakeup (version[1], mailbox[0x7fffd000], reset[0x7fffe068])
>>>
>>> This debug information will be very helpful during bring up.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/tables.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/tables.c b/drivers/acpi/tables.c
>>> index b07f7d091d13..c59a3617bca7 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/tables.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/tables.c
>>> @@ -198,6 +198,20 @@ void acpi_table_print_madt_entry(struct acpi_subtable_header *header)
>>> }
>>> break;
>>> + case ACPI_MADT_TYPE_MULTIPROC_WAKEUP:
>>> + {
>>> + struct acpi_madt_multiproc_wakeup *p =
>>> + (struct acpi_madt_multiproc_wakeup *)header;
>>> + u64 reset_vector = 0;
>>> +
>>> + if (p->version >= ACPI_MADT_MP_WAKEUP_VERSION_V1)
>>> + reset_vector = p->reset_vector;
>>> +
>>> + pr_debug("MP Wakeup (version[%d], mailbox[%#llx], reset[%#llx])\n",
>>> + p->version, p->mailbox_address, reset_vector);
>>> + }
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>
>> Hmm.. I hate to say, but maybe it is better to put this patch at some early
>> place in this series w/o mailbox version and reset_vector, and add
>> incremental changes where mailbox/reset_vector is introduced in this series.
>>
>> The advantage is in this way someone can just backport this patch to the old
>> kernel if they care -- this should be part of commit f39642d0dbacd
>> ("x86/acpi/x86/boot: Add multiprocessor wake-up support") anyway.
>
> It is not subject for backporting. It is just a cosmetics fix (or debug
> facility). Any new MADT type would generate a warning. Nothing wrong with
> it.
>

OK fine to me. Thanks.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 15:27    [W:1.541 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site