Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:7 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:7;
Date:   Sat, 9 Dec 2023 10:48:23 +0200
From:   Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
To:     mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com,
        rafael@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, robert.moore@intel.com,
        ardb@kernel.org, will@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com
Cc:     linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        acpica-devel@lists.linuxfoundation.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        mallikarjunappa.sangannavar@intel.com, bala.senthil@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] perf: arm_cspmu: drop redundant
 acpi_dev_uid_to_integer()
Message-ID: <ZXQp18e9IR5w41wW@black.fi.intel.com>
References: <20231123100617.28020-1-raag.jadav@intel.com>
 <20231123100617.28020-6-raag.jadav@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231123100617.28020-6-raag.jadav@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 03:36:17PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote:
> Now that we have _UID matching support for integer types, we can use
> acpi_dev_hid_uid_match() for it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> ---
>  drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c | 4 +---
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c
> index 2cc35dded007..50b89b989ce7 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/arm_cspmu.c
> @@ -1108,7 +1108,6 @@ static int arm_cspmu_request_irq(struct arm_cspmu *cspmu)
>  
>  static inline int arm_cspmu_find_cpu_container(int cpu, u32 container_uid)
>  {
> -	u64 acpi_uid;
>  	struct device *cpu_dev;
>  	struct acpi_device *acpi_dev;
>  
> @@ -1118,8 +1117,7 @@ static inline int arm_cspmu_find_cpu_container(int cpu, u32 container_uid)
>  
>  	acpi_dev = ACPI_COMPANION(cpu_dev);
>  	while (acpi_dev) {
> -		if (acpi_dev_hid_uid_match(acpi_dev, ACPI_PROCESSOR_CONTAINER_HID, NULL) &&
> -		    !acpi_dev_uid_to_integer(acpi_dev, &acpi_uid) && acpi_uid == container_uid)
> +		if (acpi_dev_hid_uid_match(acpi_dev, ACPI_PROCESSOR_CONTAINER_HID, container_uid))
>  			return 0;

On second thought, I just realized that this can cause false positive
in case container_uid is integer 0.

I'm not aware if that's a valid value to match against in APMT.
If it is, it's better to drop patches 2 and 5 for now.

Raag