Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ACPI/PPTT: Add support for ACPI 6.3 thread flag
To:     Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc:     linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
        sudeep.holla@arm.com, lenb@kernel.org
References: <20190614223158.49575-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
 <20190614223158.49575-2-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
 <667f95c0-5aa9-f460-a49a-e6dfefc027d8@arm.com>
From:   Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Message-ID: <2d1b547f-f9ee-391c-c4f3-0232a08a86bc@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 09:21:21 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <667f95c0-5aa9-f460-a49a-e6dfefc027d8@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 6/17/19 7:34 AM, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> Hi Jeremy,
> 
> Few nits below.
> 
> Also, I had a look at the other PPTT processor flags that were introduced
> in 6.3, and the only other one being used is ACPI_LEAF_NODE in
> acpi_pptt_leaf_node(). However that one already has a handle on the table
> header, so the check_acpi_cpu_flag() isn't of much help there.
> 
> I don't believe the other existing flags will benefit from the helper since
> they are more about describing the PPTT tree, but I think it doesn't hurt
> to keep it around for potential future flags.

That was the thought process.

> 
> On 14/06/2019 23:31, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> [...]
>> @@ -517,6 +517,43 @@ static int find_acpi_cpu_topology_tag(unsigned int cpu, int level, int flag)
>>   	return retval;
>>   }
>>   
>> +/**
>> + * check_acpi_cpu_flag() - Determine if CPU node has a flag set
>> + * @cpu: Kernel logical CPU number
>> + * @rev: The PPTT revision defining the flag
>> + * @flag: The flag itself
>> + *
>> + * Check the node representing a CPU for a given flag.
>> + *
>> + * Return: -ENOENT if the PPTT doesn't exist, the CPU cannot be found or
>> + *	   the table revision isn't new enough.
>> + * Otherwise returns flag value
>> + */
> 
> Nit: strictly speaking we're not returning the flag value but its mask
> applied to the flags field. I don't think anyone will care about getting
> the actual flag value, but it should be made obvious in the doc:

Or I clarify the code to actually do what the comments says. Maybe that 
is what John G was also pointing out too?


> 
> -ENOENT if ...
> 0 if the flag isn't set
>> 0 if it is set.
> 
> [...]
>> @@ -581,6 +618,21 @@ int cache_setup_acpi(unsigned int cpu)
>>   	return status;
>>   }
>>   
>> +/**
>> + * acpi_pptt_cpu_is_thread() - Determine if CPU is a thread
>> + * @cpu: Kernel logical CPU number
>> + *
>> + *
> 
> Nit: extra newline
> 
>> + * Return: 1, a thread
>> + *         0, not a thread
>> + *         -ENOENT ,if the PPTT doesn't exist, the CPU cannot be found or
>> + *         the table revision isn't new enough.
>> + */
>> +int acpi_pptt_cpu_is_thread(unsigned int cpu)
>> +{
>> +	return check_acpi_cpu_flag(cpu, 2, ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_IS_THREAD);
>> +}
>> +
>>   /**
>>    * find_acpi_cpu_topology() - Determine a unique topology value for a given CPU
>>    * @cpu: Kernel logical CPU number
>> @@ -641,7 +693,6 @@ int find_acpi_cpu_cache_topology(unsigned int cpu, int level)
> [...]
>