In acpi_count_levels(), the initial value of *levels passed by the
caller is really an implementation detail of acpi_count_levels(), so it
is unreasonable to expect the callers of this function to know what to
pass in for this parameter. The only sensible initial value is 0,
which is what the only upstream caller (acpi_get_cache_info()) passes.
Use a local variable for the starting cache level in acpi_count_levels(),
and pass the result back to the caller via the function return value.
Gid rid of the levels parameter, which has no remaining purpose.
Fix acpi_get_cache_info() to match.
Suggested-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes since v1:
* Rewritten commit message from Dave.
* Minor changes to kernel doc comment.
* Keep the much loved typo.
Changes since RFC:
* Made acpi_count_levels() return the levels value.
---
drivers/acpi/pptt.c | 20 ++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
index 1728545d90b2..7af7d62597df 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
@@ -177,14 +177,14 @@ acpi_find_cache_level(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
}
/**
- * acpi_count_levels() - Given a PPTT table, and a CPU node, count the cache
- * levels and split cache levels (data/instruction).
+ * acpi_count_levels() - Given a PPTT table, and a CPU node, count the
+ * total number of levels and split cache levels (data/instruction).
* @table_hdr: Pointer to the head of the PPTT table
* @cpu_node: processor node we wish to count caches for
- * @levels: Number of levels if success.
* @split_levels: Number of split cache levels (data/instruction) if
* success. Can by NULL.
*
+ * Return: number of levels.
* Given a processor node containing a processing unit, walk into it and count
* how many levels exist solely for it, and then walk up each level until we hit
* the root node (ignore the package level because it may be possible to have
@@ -192,14 +192,18 @@ acpi_find_cache_level(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
* split cache levels (data/instruction) that exist at each level on the way
* up.
*/
-static void acpi_count_levels(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
- struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu_node,
- unsigned int *levels, unsigned int *split_levels)
+static int acpi_count_levels(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
+ struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu_node,
+ unsigned int *split_levels)
{
+ int starting_level = 0;
+
do {
- acpi_find_cache_level(table_hdr, cpu_node, levels, split_levels, 0, 0);
+ acpi_find_cache_level(table_hdr, cpu_node, &starting_level, split_levels, 0, 0);
cpu_node = fetch_pptt_node(table_hdr, cpu_node->parent);
} while (cpu_node);
+
+ return starting_level;
}
/**
@@ -645,7 +649,7 @@ int acpi_get_cache_info(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int *levels,
if (!cpu_node)
return -ENOENT;
- acpi_count_levels(table, cpu_node, levels, split_levels);
+ *levels = acpi_count_levels(table, cpu_node, split_levels);
pr_debug("Cache Setup: last_level=%d split_levels=%d\n",
*levels, split_levels ? *split_levels : -1);
--
2.39.5
