All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>
To: <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	<palmer@rivosinc.com>, <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	<sudeep.holla@arm.com>, <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	<will@kernel.org>, <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	<rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: <Daire.McNamara@microchip.com>, <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>,
	<niklas.cassel@wdc.com>, <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
	<geert@linux-m68k.org>, <zong.li@sifive.com>, <kernel@esmil.dk>,
	<hahnjo@hahnjo.de>, <guoren@kernel.org>, <anup@brainfault.org>,
	<atishp@atishpatra.org>, <changbin.du@intel.com>,
	<heiko@sntech.de>, <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>, <robh@kernel.org>,
	<maz@kernel.org>, <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <Brice.Goglin@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/4] Fix RISC-V's arch-topology reporting
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 22:06:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ab1826e-69d5-8144-70ee-9df95d62df09@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220707220436.4105443-1-mail@conchuod.ie>



On 07/07/2022 23:04, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> 
> Hey all,
> It's my first time messing around with arch/ code at all, let alone
> more than one arch, so forgive me if I have screwed up how to do a
> migration like this.
> 
> The goal here is the fix the incorrectly reported arch topology on
> RISC-V which seems to have been broken since it was added.
> cpu, package and thread IDs are all currently reported as -1, so tools
> like lstopo think systems have multiple threads on the same core when
> this is not true:
> https://github.com/open-mpi/hwloc/issues/536
> 
> Because I want to backport that fix, I implemented store_cpu_topology
> for RISC-V before migrating to the generic version which seems to have
> just complicated things, but was Sudeep's preferred way of doing it.
> 
> Palmer, I have not marked the first patch as RFC because I would like
> it to be taken as a fix for 5.19-rc(late) independently of the rest if
> possible.

Apparently I forgot to swap RFC for PATCH on it, but point still stands.
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>
To: <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	<palmer@rivosinc.com>, <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	<sudeep.holla@arm.com>, <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	<will@kernel.org>, <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	<rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: <Daire.McNamara@microchip.com>, <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>,
	<niklas.cassel@wdc.com>, <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
	<geert@linux-m68k.org>, <zong.li@sifive.com>, <kernel@esmil.dk>,
	<hahnjo@hahnjo.de>, <guoren@kernel.org>, <anup@brainfault.org>,
	<atishp@atishpatra.org>, <changbin.du@intel.com>,
	<heiko@sntech.de>, <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>, <robh@kernel.org>,
	<maz@kernel.org>, <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <Brice.Goglin@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/4] Fix RISC-V's arch-topology reporting
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 22:06:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ab1826e-69d5-8144-70ee-9df95d62df09@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220707220436.4105443-1-mail@conchuod.ie>



On 07/07/2022 23:04, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> 
> Hey all,
> It's my first time messing around with arch/ code at all, let alone
> more than one arch, so forgive me if I have screwed up how to do a
> migration like this.
> 
> The goal here is the fix the incorrectly reported arch topology on
> RISC-V which seems to have been broken since it was added.
> cpu, package and thread IDs are all currently reported as -1, so tools
> like lstopo think systems have multiple threads on the same core when
> this is not true:
> https://github.com/open-mpi/hwloc/issues/536
> 
> Because I want to backport that fix, I implemented store_cpu_topology
> for RISC-V before migrating to the generic version which seems to have
> just complicated things, but was Sudeep's preferred way of doing it.
> 
> Palmer, I have not marked the first patch as RFC because I would like
> it to be taken as a fix for 5.19-rc(late) independently of the rest if
> possible.

Apparently I forgot to swap RFC for PATCH on it, but point still stands.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>
To: <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	<palmer@rivosinc.com>, <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	<sudeep.holla@arm.com>, <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	<will@kernel.org>, <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	<rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: <Daire.McNamara@microchip.com>, <Conor.Dooley@microchip.com>,
	<niklas.cassel@wdc.com>, <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
	<geert@linux-m68k.org>, <zong.li@sifive.com>, <kernel@esmil.dk>,
	<hahnjo@hahnjo.de>, <guoren@kernel.org>, <anup@brainfault.org>,
	<atishp@atishpatra.org>, <changbin.du@intel.com>,
	<heiko@sntech.de>, <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>, <robh@kernel.org>,
	<maz@kernel.org>, <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <Brice.Goglin@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/4] Fix RISC-V's arch-topology reporting
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 22:06:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ab1826e-69d5-8144-70ee-9df95d62df09@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220707220436.4105443-1-mail@conchuod.ie>



On 07/07/2022 23:04, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> 
> Hey all,
> It's my first time messing around with arch/ code at all, let alone
> more than one arch, so forgive me if I have screwed up how to do a
> migration like this.
> 
> The goal here is the fix the incorrectly reported arch topology on
> RISC-V which seems to have been broken since it was added.
> cpu, package and thread IDs are all currently reported as -1, so tools
> like lstopo think systems have multiple threads on the same core when
> this is not true:
> https://github.com/open-mpi/hwloc/issues/536
> 
> Because I want to backport that fix, I implemented store_cpu_topology
> for RISC-V before migrating to the generic version which seems to have
> just complicated things, but was Sudeep's preferred way of doing it.
> 
> Palmer, I have not marked the first patch as RFC because I would like
> it to be taken as a fix for 5.19-rc(late) independently of the rest if
> possible.

Apparently I forgot to swap RFC for PATCH on it, but point still stands.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-07-07 22:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-07-07 22:04 [PATCH/RFC 0/4] Fix RISC-V's arch-topology reporting Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04 ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04 ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04 ` [RFC 1/4] riscv: arch-topology: fix default topology reporting Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04   ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04   ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04 ` [RFC 2/4] arch-topology: add a default implementation of store_cpu_topology() Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04   ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04   ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-08  8:24   ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08  8:24     ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08  8:24     ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08  8:35     ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-08  8:35       ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-08  8:35       ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-08  9:21       ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08  9:21         ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08  9:21         ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08  9:28         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-07-08  9:28           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-07-08  9:28           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2022-07-08  9:47           ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08  9:47             ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08  9:47             ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08 10:03             ` Greg KH
2022-07-08 10:03               ` Greg KH
2022-07-08 10:03               ` Greg KH
2022-07-08 11:39               ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08 11:39                 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08 11:39                 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08 11:57                 ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-08 11:57                   ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-08 11:57                   ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-08 13:59                   ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08 13:59                     ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08 13:59                     ` Sudeep Holla
2022-07-08 10:02         ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-08 10:02           ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-08 10:02           ` Conor.Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04 ` [RFC 3/4] riscv: arch-topology: move riscv to the generic store_cpu_topology() Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04   ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04   ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04 ` [RFC 4/4] arm64: arch-topology move arm64 " Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04   ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:04   ` Conor Dooley
2022-07-07 22:06 ` Conor.Dooley [this message]
2022-07-07 22:06   ` [PATCH/RFC 0/4] Fix RISC-V's arch-topology reporting Conor.Dooley
2022-07-07 22:06   ` Conor.Dooley

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=0ab1826e-69d5-8144-70ee-9df95d62df09@microchip.com \
    --to=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
    --cc=Brice.Goglin@inria.fr \
    --cc=Daire.McNamara@microchip.com \
    --cc=anup@brainfault.org \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=atishp@atishpatra.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=changbin.du@intel.com \
    --cc=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=guoren@kernel.org \
    --cc=hahnjo@hahnjo.de \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=kernel@esmil.dk \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=niklas.cassel@wdc.com \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=palmer@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=zong.li@sifive.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.