Page MenuHomeFreeBSD
Differential D13457

Implement ACPI CPU support when Processor object is not present
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by cem on Dec 12 2017, 12:25 AM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Apr 5 2024, 2:52 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jan 13 2024, 4:15 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Dec 22 2023, 10:48 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Dec 14 2023, 6:44 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 27 2023, 10:06 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Aug 30 2023, 7:02 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Jul 13 2023, 9:53 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jul 9 2023, 11:24 AM
View All 21 Files
Subscribers
imp
rang_acm.org

Details

Reviewers
jhb
markj
jkim
rang_acm.org
Commits
rS326956: Implement ACPI CPU support when Processor object is not present
Summary

By standard (ACPI 5 chapter 8.4 Declaring Processors) Processors can be
implemented in 2 distinct ways:

  • Through a Processor object type (which provides P_BLK)
  • Through a Device object type

Right now FreeBSD driver only supports the former, while AMD Epyc/Poweredge so
far both implement the latter. Add the missing support.

Because P_BLK is not defined in the device object case, C-states entering must
be completely controlled via _CST methods rather than P_LVL2/3.

Submitted by: Attilio

Diff Detail

Repository
rS FreeBSD src repository - subversion
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

cem created this revision.Dec 12 2017, 12:25 AM
Herald added a subscriber: imp. · View Herald TranscriptDec 12 2017, 12:25 AM
Harbormaster completed remote builds in B13494: Diff 36484.Dec 12 2017, 12:25 AM
markj accepted this revision.Dec 12 2017, 2:50 PM

Looks ok to me, but I'm relatively unfamiliar with this code and with ACPI in general.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Dec 12 2017, 2:50 PM
rang_acm.org accepted this revision.Dec 13 2017, 4:59 PM
rang_acm.org added a subscriber: rang_acm.org.

Looks correct to me per the spec.

cem added a comment.Dec 14 2017, 10:34 PM

@jhb , @jkim : Any objection? Are you planning on reviewing in the next few days, or should I go ahead and commit this?

jhb accepted this revision.Dec 18 2017, 10:09 PM

This looks good to me. As far as the commit log, ACPI 6.0 formally deprecates the Processor keyword, so eventually processors will only be enumerated as Device() objects.

Closed by commit rS326956: Implement ACPI CPU support when Processor object is not present (authored by cem). · Explain WhyDec 19 2017, 2:49 AM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

Revision Contents
Changeset List

PathSize
head/
sys/
dev/
acpica/
102 lines

Diff 36747

View Options

head/sys/dev/acpica/acpi_cpu.c

Loading...