On Tuesday 30 October 2007 19:50, Alex Chiang wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for comments on the following patch that exposes _SUN
> on processor objects in /proc/acpi/processor/<...>/info.
>
> This didn't get many comments on the linux-acpi list, so I'm
> sending to a wider distribution.
>
> I notice that acpiphp exposes _SUN for (hotpluggable) PCI slots
> in /sys/bus/pci/slots/N/, where N is the value of _SUN. I'm not
> so sure we want to go *exactly* in the same direction for CPUs,
> because:
>
> - x86 systems might not implement _SUN for processors
> - ia64 systems that implement ACPI 2.x do not have unique
> values for _SUN across the entire system
>
> Nonetheless, even non-unique values of _SUN are still helpful for
> userspace to figure out which physical socket a CPU might be in,
> especially when combined with information from /proc/cpuinfo.
>
> Thoughts?
We've not allowed new features in /proc/acpi
since we started removing /proc/acpi.
ie. we don't want to update the API, we want to delete it.
If this is a useful thing for user-space to know, then you need
to figure out a generic way to present it -- likely under
/sys/devices/system/cpu/
Andrew, please remove acpi-expose-_sun-in-proc-acpi-processor-info.patch
from the mm series.
thanks,
-Len
>
> From: Alex Chiang <[email protected]>
>
> On platforms that provide _SUN for the processor object, higher
> level software can consume the data to learn physical topology
> information, so let's expose it.
>
> Platforms that do not implement _SUN will see <not supported>.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Chiang <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 11 +++++++++++
> include/acpi/processor.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> index 235a51e..86cb41a 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
> @@ -302,6 +302,11 @@ static int acpi_processor_info_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *offset)
> pr->flags.throttling ? "yes" : "no",
> pr->flags.limit ? "yes" : "no");
>
> + if (pr->sun == -1)
> + seq_printf(seq, "slot user number: <not supported>\n");
> + else
> + seq_printf(seq, "slot user number: %d\n", (int)pr->sun);
> +
> end:
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -590,6 +595,12 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_processor *pr, unsigned has_uid)
> ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT((ACPI_DB_INFO, "Processor [%d:%d]\n", pr->id,
> pr->acpi_id));
>
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object(pr->handle, "_SUN", NULL, &buffer);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> + object.integer.value = -1;
> +
> + pr->sun = object.integer.value;
> +
> if (!object.processor.pblk_address)
> ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT((ACPI_DB_INFO, "No PBLK (NULL address)\n"));
> else if (object.processor.pblk_length != 6)
> diff --git a/include/acpi/processor.h b/include/acpi/processor.h
> index 26d79f6..81792c6 100644
> --- a/include/acpi/processor.h
> +++ b/include/acpi/processor.h
> @@ -210,6 +210,7 @@ struct acpi_processor {
> u32 acpi_id;
> u32 id;
> u32 pblk;
> + acpi_native_int sun;
> int performance_platform_limit;
> int throttling_platform_limit;
> /* 0 - states 0..n-th state available */
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
