[patch v11 13/23] ACPI / processor: Introduce phys_cpuid_t for CPU hardware ID

[Will Deacon]

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 03:49:33AM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2015/3/26 1:21, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:02:46PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >> CPU hardware ID (phys_id) is defined as u32 in structure acpi_processor,
> >> but phys_id is used as int in acpi processor driver, so it will lead to
> >> some inconsistence for the drivers.
> >>
> >> Furthermore, to cater for ACPI arch ports that implement 64 bits CPU
> >> ids a generic CPU physical id type is required.
> >>
> >> So introduce typedef u32 phys_cpuid_t in a common file, and introduce
> >> a macro PHYS_CPUID_INVALID as (phys_cpuid_t)(-1) if it's not defined
> >> by other archs, this will solve the inconsistence in acpi processor driver,
> >> and will prepare for the ACPI on ARM64 for the 64 bit CPU hardware ID
> >> in the following patch.
> >>
> >> CC: Rafael J Wysocki <rjw at rjwysocki.net>
> >> Suggested-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi at arm.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely at linaro.org>
> >> Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com>
> >> Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi at arm.com>
> >> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki at intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
> >> [hj: reworked cpu physid map return codes]
> >> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo at linaro.org>
> > BTW, am I still the author of this patch? If yes, it's missing a From:
> > line.
> 
> Oops, you should be the author, can Will fix this in his tree?

Fixed.

Will