From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752631AbaBGT2S (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Feb 2014 14:28:18 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:58653 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751013AbaBGT2Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Feb 2014 14:28:16 -0500 Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 11:29:25 -0800 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Sudeep Holla Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT v2 1/8] drivers: base: support cpu cache information interface to userspace via sysfs Message-ID: <20140207192925.GB18771@kroah.com> References: <1391791763-28518-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1391791763-28518-2-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1391791763-28518-2-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 04:49:16PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > From: Sudeep Holla > > This patch adds initial support for providing processor cache information > to userspace through sysfs interface. This is based on already existing > implementations(x86, ia64, s390 and powerpc) and hence the interface is > intended to be fully compatible. > > The main purpose of this generic support is to avoid further code > duplication to support new architectures and also to unify all the existing > different implementations. > > This implementation maintains the hierarchy of cache objects which reflects > the system's cache topology. Cache objects are instantiated as needed as > CPUs come online. The cache objects are replicated per-cpu even if they are > shared. A per-cpu array of cache information maintained is used mainly for > sysfs-related book keeping. I thought I asked that you not use "raw" kobjects for this, instead using 'struct device' or just an attribute group? Using a kobject means that userspace tools that use libudev have no chance to see these attributes at all, which is not good, right? thanks, greg k-h