From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Brice.Goglin@inria.fr,atishp@atishpatra.org,atishp@rivosinc.com,catalin.marinas@arm.com,conor.dooley@microchip.com,gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,palmer@dabbelt.com,sudeep.holla@arm.com,will@kernel.org
Cc: <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code" has been added to the 5.10-stable tree
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2022 12:16:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1666865766200196@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221019125303.2845522-1-conor.dooley@microchip.com>
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code
to the 5.10-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
arm64-topology-move-store_cpu_topology-to-shared-code.patch
and it can be found in the queue-5.10 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
From foo@baz Thu Oct 27 12:15:29 PM CEST 2022
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 13:53:02 +0100
Subject: arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code
To: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <conor.dooley@microchip.com>, <Brice.Goglin@inria.fr>, <atishp@atishpatra.org>, <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <palmer@dabbelt.com>, <sudeep.holla@arm.com>, <will@kernel.org>, Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>
Message-ID: <20221019125303.2845522-1-conor.dooley@microchip.com>
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
commit 456797da792fa7cbf6698febf275fe9b36691f78 upstream.
arm64's method of defining a default cpu topology requires only minimal
changes to apply to RISC-V also. The current arm64 implementation exits
early in a uniprocessor configuration by reading MPIDR & claiming that
uniprocessor can rely on the default values.
This is appears to be a hangover from prior to '3102bc0e6ac7 ("arm64:
topology: Stop using MPIDR for topology information")', because the
current code just assigns default values for multiprocessor systems.
With the MPIDR references removed, store_cpu_topolgy() can be moved to
the common arch_topology code.
Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>
Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 40 ----------------------------------------
drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
@@ -22,46 +22,6 @@
#include <asm/cputype.h>
#include <asm/topology.h>
-void store_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpuid)
-{
- struct cpu_topology *cpuid_topo = &cpu_topology[cpuid];
- u64 mpidr;
-
- if (cpuid_topo->package_id != -1)
- goto topology_populated;
-
- mpidr = read_cpuid_mpidr();
-
- /* Uniprocessor systems can rely on default topology values */
- if (mpidr & MPIDR_UP_BITMASK)
- return;
-
- /*
- * This would be the place to create cpu topology based on MPIDR.
- *
- * However, it cannot be trusted to depict the actual topology; some
- * pieces of the architecture enforce an artificial cap on Aff0 values
- * (e.g. GICv3's ICC_SGI1R_EL1 limits it to 15), leading to an
- * artificial cycling of Aff1, Aff2 and Aff3 values. IOW, these end up
- * having absolutely no relationship to the actual underlying system
- * topology, and cannot be reasonably used as core / package ID.
- *
- * If the MT bit is set, Aff0 *could* be used to define a thread ID, but
- * we still wouldn't be able to obtain a sane core ID. This means we
- * need to entirely ignore MPIDR for any topology deduction.
- */
- cpuid_topo->thread_id = -1;
- cpuid_topo->core_id = cpuid;
- cpuid_topo->package_id = cpu_to_node(cpuid);
-
- pr_debug("CPU%u: cluster %d core %d thread %d mpidr %#016llx\n",
- cpuid, cpuid_topo->package_id, cpuid_topo->core_id,
- cpuid_topo->thread_id, mpidr);
-
-topology_populated:
- update_siblings_masks(cpuid);
-}
-
#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
static bool __init acpi_cpu_is_threaded(int cpu)
{
--- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
+++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
@@ -596,4 +596,23 @@ void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
else if (of_have_populated_dt() && parse_dt_topology())
reset_cpu_topology();
}
+
+void store_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpuid)
+{
+ struct cpu_topology *cpuid_topo = &cpu_topology[cpuid];
+
+ if (cpuid_topo->package_id != -1)
+ goto topology_populated;
+
+ cpuid_topo->thread_id = -1;
+ cpuid_topo->core_id = cpuid;
+ cpuid_topo->package_id = cpu_to_node(cpuid);
+
+ pr_debug("CPU%u: package %d core %d thread %d\n",
+ cpuid, cpuid_topo->package_id, cpuid_topo->core_id,
+ cpuid_topo->thread_id);
+
+topology_populated:
+ update_siblings_masks(cpuid);
+}
#endif
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from conor.dooley@microchip.com are
queue-5.10/arm64-topology-move-store_cpu_topology-to-shared-code.patch
queue-5.10/riscv-topology-fix-default-topology-reporting.patch
queue-5.10/riscv-always-honor-the-config_cmdline_force-when-par.patch
_______________________________________________
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: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Brice.Goglin@inria.fr,atishp@atishpatra.org,atishp@rivosinc.com,catalin.marinas@arm.com,conor.dooley@microchip.com,gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,palmer@dabbelt.com,sudeep.holla@arm.com,will@kernel.org
Cc: <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code" has been added to the 5.10-stable tree
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2022 12:16:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1666865766200196@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221019125303.2845522-1-conor.dooley@microchip.com>
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code
to the 5.10-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
arm64-topology-move-store_cpu_topology-to-shared-code.patch
and it can be found in the queue-5.10 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
From foo@baz Thu Oct 27 12:15:29 PM CEST 2022
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 13:53:02 +0100
Subject: arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code
To: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <conor.dooley@microchip.com>, <Brice.Goglin@inria.fr>, <atishp@atishpatra.org>, <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <palmer@dabbelt.com>, <sudeep.holla@arm.com>, <will@kernel.org>, Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>
Message-ID: <20221019125303.2845522-1-conor.dooley@microchip.com>
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
commit 456797da792fa7cbf6698febf275fe9b36691f78 upstream.
arm64's method of defining a default cpu topology requires only minimal
changes to apply to RISC-V also. The current arm64 implementation exits
early in a uniprocessor configuration by reading MPIDR & claiming that
uniprocessor can rely on the default values.
This is appears to be a hangover from prior to '3102bc0e6ac7 ("arm64:
topology: Stop using MPIDR for topology information")', because the
current code just assigns default values for multiprocessor systems.
With the MPIDR references removed, store_cpu_topolgy() can be moved to
the common arch_topology code.
Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>
Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 40 ----------------------------------------
drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
@@ -22,46 +22,6 @@
#include <asm/cputype.h>
#include <asm/topology.h>
-void store_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpuid)
-{
- struct cpu_topology *cpuid_topo = &cpu_topology[cpuid];
- u64 mpidr;
-
- if (cpuid_topo->package_id != -1)
- goto topology_populated;
-
- mpidr = read_cpuid_mpidr();
-
- /* Uniprocessor systems can rely on default topology values */
- if (mpidr & MPIDR_UP_BITMASK)
- return;
-
- /*
- * This would be the place to create cpu topology based on MPIDR.
- *
- * However, it cannot be trusted to depict the actual topology; some
- * pieces of the architecture enforce an artificial cap on Aff0 values
- * (e.g. GICv3's ICC_SGI1R_EL1 limits it to 15), leading to an
- * artificial cycling of Aff1, Aff2 and Aff3 values. IOW, these end up
- * having absolutely no relationship to the actual underlying system
- * topology, and cannot be reasonably used as core / package ID.
- *
- * If the MT bit is set, Aff0 *could* be used to define a thread ID, but
- * we still wouldn't be able to obtain a sane core ID. This means we
- * need to entirely ignore MPIDR for any topology deduction.
- */
- cpuid_topo->thread_id = -1;
- cpuid_topo->core_id = cpuid;
- cpuid_topo->package_id = cpu_to_node(cpuid);
-
- pr_debug("CPU%u: cluster %d core %d thread %d mpidr %#016llx\n",
- cpuid, cpuid_topo->package_id, cpuid_topo->core_id,
- cpuid_topo->thread_id, mpidr);
-
-topology_populated:
- update_siblings_masks(cpuid);
-}
-
#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
static bool __init acpi_cpu_is_threaded(int cpu)
{
--- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
+++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
@@ -596,4 +596,23 @@ void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
else if (of_have_populated_dt() && parse_dt_topology())
reset_cpu_topology();
}
+
+void store_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpuid)
+{
+ struct cpu_topology *cpuid_topo = &cpu_topology[cpuid];
+
+ if (cpuid_topo->package_id != -1)
+ goto topology_populated;
+
+ cpuid_topo->thread_id = -1;
+ cpuid_topo->core_id = cpuid;
+ cpuid_topo->package_id = cpu_to_node(cpuid);
+
+ pr_debug("CPU%u: package %d core %d thread %d\n",
+ cpuid, cpuid_topo->package_id, cpuid_topo->core_id,
+ cpuid_topo->thread_id);
+
+topology_populated:
+ update_siblings_masks(cpuid);
+}
#endif
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from conor.dooley@microchip.com are
queue-5.10/arm64-topology-move-store_cpu_topology-to-shared-code.patch
queue-5.10/riscv-topology-fix-default-topology-reporting.patch
queue-5.10/riscv-always-honor-the-config_cmdline_force-when-par.patch
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-27 10:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-19 12:53 [PATCH 5.10 1/2] arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code Conor Dooley
2022-10-19 12:53 ` Conor Dooley
2022-10-19 12:53 ` Conor Dooley
2022-10-19 12:53 ` [PATCH 5.10 2/2] riscv: topology: fix default topology reporting Conor Dooley
2022-10-19 12:53 ` Conor Dooley
2022-10-19 12:53 ` Conor Dooley
2022-10-27 10:16 ` Patch "riscv: topology: fix default topology reporting" has been added to the 5.10-stable tree gregkh
2022-10-27 10:16 ` gregkh
2022-10-27 10:16 ` gregkh [this message]
2022-10-27 10:16 ` Patch "arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code" " gregkh
2022-10-27 10:19 ` [PATCH 5.10 1/2] arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code Greg KH
2022-10-27 10:19 ` Greg KH
2022-10-27 10:19 ` Greg KH
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=1666865766200196@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=Brice.Goglin@inria.fr \
--cc=atishp@atishpatra.org \
--cc=atishp@rivosinc.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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.