Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 30 Oct 2007 17:50:57 -0600 | From | Alex Chiang <> | Subject | [PATCH] [RFC] Expose _SUN in /proc/acpi/processor/<...>/info |
| |
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?
Thanks.
/ac
From: Alex Chiang <achiang@hp.com>
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 <achiang@hp.com> --- 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 */ -- 1.5.3.1.1.g1e61 - 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/
| |