Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752695Ab0AYXBx (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:01:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752331Ab0AYXBw (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:01:52 -0500 Received: from g4t0015.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.18]:19484 "EHLO g4t0015.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750734Ab0AYXBw (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:01:52 -0500 X-IMAP-Sender: achiang Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:46:28 -0700 X-OfflineIMAP-978951131-6c646c-494e424f582e4f7574626f78: 1264459603-0930583078911-v6.2.0 From: Alex Chiang To: David Rientjes Cc: lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/12] ACPI: processor: refactor internal map_lsapic_id() Message-ID: <20100125224628.GB2828@grease.ALLEYCAT> References: <20100125213221.28510.74078.stgit@bob.kio> <20100125214129.28510.72412.stgit@bob.kio> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1814 Lines: 52 Hi David, * David Rientjes : > On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Alex Chiang wrote: > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c > > index 9213f95..ec5989c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c > > @@ -83,27 +83,17 @@ static int map_lsapic_id(struct acpi_subtable_header *entry, > > { > > struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *lsapic = > > (struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *)entry; > > - u32 tmp = (lsapic->id << 8) | lsapic->eid; > > > > - /* Only check enabled APICs*/ > > if (!(lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED)) > > return 0; > > > > - /* Device statement declaration type */ > > if (device_declaration) { > > - if (entry->length < 16) > > - printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX > > - "Invalid LSAPIC with Device type processor (SAPIC ID %#x)\n", > > - tmp); > > Why drop this error message? It didn't seem to add any value. If BIOS declares a processor with the Device statement in ACPI and it has an invalid length, there's nothing that a user can do about it. Arguably, the message might be useful during internal platform bringup (or new firmware validation), but even that's a hard sell to me, since one of the first things a bringup engineer would notice would be missing CPUs, and it wouldn't take that long to realize that firmware was broken; why make upstream carry around extra baggage for internal firmware debugging? But I don't have a strong opinion here. If folks think that message is useful, I can respin leaving it in. Thanks, /ac -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/