Re: [PATCH RFC v3 10/21] ACPI: Check _STA present bit before making CPUs not present
Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> Fri, 15 Dec 2023 16:18:03 +0000
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-ia64,dev.linux.lists.acpica-devel,dev.linux.lists.kvmarm,dev.linux.lists.loongarch,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.infradead.lists.linux-riscv,org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi,org.kernel.vger.linux-arch,org.kernel.vger.linux-csky,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-parisc,org.kernel.vger.linux-pm |
|---|---|
| Organization | Huawei Technologies Research and Development (UK) Ltd. |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 12:50:02 +0000 Russell King (Oracle) <[email protected]> wrote: > From: James Morse <[email protected]> > > When called acpi_processor_post_eject() unconditionally make a CPU > not-present and unregisters it. > > To add support for AML events where the CPU has become disabled, but > remains present, the _STA method should be checked before calling > acpi_processor_remove(). > > Rename acpi_processor_post_eject() acpi_processor_remove_possible(), and > check the _STA before calling. > > Adding the function prototype for arch_unregister_cpu() allows the > preprocessor guards to be removed. > > After this change CPUs will remain registered and visible to > user-space as offline if buggy firmware triggers an eject-request, > but doesn't clear the corresponding _STA bits after _EJ0 has been > called. > > Signed-off-by: James Morse <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Miguel Luis <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Vishnu Pajjuri <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Jianyong Wu <[email protected]> LGTM Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>