The platform used LPI need check if the LPI support and the entry
method is valid by the acpi_processor_ffh_lpi_probe(). But the return
of acpi_processor_ffh_lpi_probe() in acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev()
isn't verified by any caller.

What's more, acpi_processor_get_power_info() is a more logical place for
verifying the validity of FFH LPI than acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev().
So move acpi_processor_ffh_lpi_probe() from the latter to the former and
verify its return.

Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
index ba4cde028b0e..4b2c740da86f 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c
@@ -1237,7 +1237,7 @@ static void acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_states(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 }
 
 /**
- * acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev - prepares and configures CPUIDLE
+ * acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev - configures CPUIDLE
  * device i.e. per-cpu data
  *
  * @pr: the ACPI processor
@@ -1250,12 +1250,8 @@ static void acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_dev(struct acpi_processor *pr,
 		return;
 
 	dev->cpu = pr->id;
-	if (pr->flags.has_lpi) {
-		acpi_processor_ffh_lpi_probe(pr->id);
-		return;
-	}
-
-	acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
+	if (!pr->flags.has_lpi)
+		acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(pr, dev);
 }
 
 static int acpi_processor_get_power_info(struct acpi_processor *pr)
@@ -1264,7 +1260,13 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_power_info(struct acpi_processor *pr)
 
 	ret = acpi_processor_get_lpi_info(pr);
 	if (ret)
-		ret = acpi_processor_get_cstate_info(pr);
+		return acpi_processor_get_cstate_info(pr);
+
+	if (pr->flags.has_lpi) {
+		ret = acpi_processor_ffh_lpi_probe(pr->id);
+		if (ret)
+			pr_err("Processor FFH LPI state is invalid.\n");
+	}
 
 	return ret;
 }
-- 
2.33.0