All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com (Lorenzo Pieralisi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 15:48:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140424144846.GB8191@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1398198078-7473-2-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org>

On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 09:21:16PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> From: Mark Brown <broonie@linaro.org>
> 
> Add support for parsing the explicit topology bindings to discover the
> topology of the system.
> 
> Since it is not currently clear how to map multi-level clusters for the
> scheduler all leaf clusters are presented to the scheduler at the same
> level. This should be enough to provide good support for current systems.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@linaro.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 203 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 195 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> index ff662b23af5f..a326f5b37546 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> @@ -17,10 +17,191 @@
>  #include <linux/percpu.h>
>  #include <linux/node.h>
>  #include <linux/nodemask.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/topology.h>
>  
> +static int __init get_cpu_for_node(struct device_node *node)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *cpu_node;
> +	int cpu;
> +
> +	cpu_node = of_parse_phandle(node, "cpu", 0);
> +	if (!cpu_node)
> +		return -1;
> +
> +	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
> +		if (of_get_cpu_node(cpu, NULL) == cpu_node) {
> +			of_node_put(cpu_node);
> +			return cpu;
> +		}
> +
> +	pr_crit("Unable to find CPU node for %s\n", cpu_node->full_name);
> +
> +	of_node_put(cpu_node);
> +	return -1;
> +}
> +
> +static int __init parse_core(struct device_node *core, int cluster_id,
> +			     int core_id)
> +{
> +	char name[10];
> +	bool leaf = true;
> +	int i = 0;
> +	int cpu;
> +	struct device_node *t;
> +
> +	do {
> +		snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "thread%d", i);
> +		t = of_get_child_by_name(core, name);
> +		if (t) {
> +			leaf = false;
> +			cpu = get_cpu_for_node(t);
> +			if (cpu >= 0) {
> +				cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id = cluster_id;
> +				cpu_topology[cpu].core_id = core_id;
> +				cpu_topology[cpu].thread_id = i;
> +			} else {
> +				pr_err("%s: Can't get CPU for thread\n",
> +				       t->full_name);
> +				of_node_put(t);
> +				return -EINVAL;
> +			}
> +			of_node_put(t);
> +		}
> +		i++;
> +	} while (t);
> +
> +	cpu = get_cpu_for_node(core);
> +	if (cpu >= 0) {
> +		if (!leaf) {
> +			pr_err("%s: Core has both threads and CPU\n",
> +			       core->full_name);
> +			return -EINVAL;
> +		}
> +
> +		cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id = cluster_id;
> +		cpu_topology[cpu].core_id = core_id;
> +	} else if (leaf) {
> +		pr_err("%s: Can't get CPU for leaf core\n", core->full_name);
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int __init parse_cluster(struct device_node *cluster, int depth)
> +{
> +	char name[10];
> +	bool leaf = true;
> +	bool has_cores = false;
> +	struct device_node *c;
> +	static int cluster_id __initdata;
> +	int core_id = 0;
> +	int i, ret;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * First check for child clusters; we currently ignore any
> +	 * information about the nesting of clusters and present the
> +	 * scheduler with a flat list of them.
> +	 */
> +	i = 0;
> +	do {
> +		snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "cluster%d", i);
> +		c = of_get_child_by_name(cluster, name);
> +		if (c) {
> +			leaf = false;
> +			ret = parse_cluster(c, depth + 1);
> +			of_node_put(c);
> +			if (ret != 0)
> +				return ret;
> +		}
> +		i++;
> +	} while (c);
> +
> +	/* Now check for cores */
> +	i = 0;
> +	do {
> +		snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "core%d", i);
> +		c = of_get_child_by_name(cluster, name);
> +		if (c) {
> +			has_cores = true;
> +
> +			if (depth == 0) {
> +				pr_err("%s: cpu-map children should be clusters\n",
> +				       c->full_name);
> +				of_node_put(c);
> +				return -EINVAL;
> +			}
> +
> +			if (leaf) {
> +				ret = parse_core(c, cluster_id, core_id++);
> +			} else {
> +				pr_err("%s: Non-leaf cluster with core %s\n",
> +				       cluster->full_name, name);
> +				ret = -EINVAL;
> +			}
> +
> +			of_node_put(c);
> +			if (ret != 0)
> +				return ret;
> +		}
> +		i++;
> +	} while (c);
> +
> +	if (leaf && !has_cores)
> +		pr_warn("%s: empty cluster\n", cluster->full_name);
> +
> +	if (leaf)
> +		cluster_id++;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int __init parse_dt_topology(void)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *cn, *map;
> +	int ret = 0;
> +	int cpu;
> +
> +	cn = of_find_node_by_path("/cpus");
> +	if (!cn) {
> +		pr_err("No CPU information found in DT\n");
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * When topology is provided cpu-map is essentially a root
> +	 * cluster with restricted subnodes.
> +	 */
> +	map = of_get_child_by_name(cn, "cpu-map");
> +	if (!map)
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	ret = parse_cluster(map, 0);
> +	if (ret != 0)
> +		goto out_map;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Check that all cores are in the topology; the SMP code will
> +	 * only mark cores described in the DT as possible.
> +	 */
> +	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> +		if (cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id == -1) {
> +			pr_err("CPU%d: No topology information specified\n",
> +			       cpu);
> +			ret = -EINVAL;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +out_map:
> +	of_node_put(map);
> +out:
> +	of_node_put(cn);
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * cpu topology table
>   */
> @@ -39,8 +220,7 @@ static void update_siblings_masks(unsigned int cpuid)
>  
>  	if (cpuid_topo->cluster_id == -1) {
>  		/*
> -		 * DT does not contain topology information for this cpu
> -		 * reset it to default behaviour
> +		 * DT does not contain topology information for this cpu.
>  		 */
>  		pr_debug("CPU%u: No topology information configured\n", cpuid);
>  		return;
> @@ -71,15 +251,10 @@ void store_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpuid)
>  	update_siblings_masks(cpuid);
>  }
>  
> -/*
> - * init_cpu_topology is called at boot when only one cpu is running
> - * which prevent simultaneous write access to cpu_topology array
> - */
> -void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
> +static void __init reset_cpu_topology(void)
>  {
>  	unsigned int cpu;
>  
> -	/* init core mask and power*/
>  	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>  		struct cpu_topology *cpu_topo = &cpu_topology[cpu];
>  
> @@ -93,3 +268,15 @@ void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
>  		cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &cpu_topo->thread_sibling);
>  	}
>  }
> +
> +void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
> +{
> +	reset_cpu_topology();
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Discard anything that was parsed if we hit an error so we
> +	 * don't use partial information.
> +	 */
> +	if (parse_dt_topology())
> +		reset_cpu_topology();
> +}

I tested it and tried to clobber it a bit with some DT changes, it seems
fine.

Apart from an ultra-minor decoration change (attached):

Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-arm64-kernel-topology-minor-cosmetic-changes.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 1008 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20140424/75fec107/attachment.bin>

  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-24 14:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-22 20:21 [PATCH 1/4] arm64: topology: Initialise default topology state immediately Mark Brown
2014-04-22 20:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-04-24 14:48   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2014-04-22 20:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64: topology: Tell the scheduler about the relative power of cores Mark Brown
2014-04-22 20:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] arm64: topology: Provide relative power numbers for cores Mark Brown
2014-04-24 14:39 ` [PATCH 1/4] arm64: topology: Initialise default topology state immediately Lorenzo Pieralisi
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-03-21 17:27 Mark Brown
2014-03-21 17:27 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-03-24 15:36   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-03-24 15:45     ` Mark Brown
2014-03-24 16:02       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-03-24 16:27         ` Mark Brown
2014-02-26  0:48 [PATCH 0/4] arm64: Topology Mark Brown
2014-02-26  0:48 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-02-25  4:25 [PATCH 0/4] arm64: topology: CPU topology support Mark Brown
2014-02-25  4:25 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-02-11 22:06 [PATCH 1/4] arm64: topology: Implement basic CPU topology support Mark Brown
2014-02-11 22:06 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-02-10 13:02 [PATCH 1/4] arm64: topology: Implement basic CPU topology support Mark Brown
2014-02-10 13:02 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-01-15 11:38 [PATCH v12 0/4] arm64 topology Mark Brown
2014-01-15 11:38 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-01-12 19:20 [PATCH v11 0/4] ARMv8 cpu topology Mark Brown
2014-01-12 19:20 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-01-14 11:43   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-01-14 12:36     ` Mark Brown
2014-01-08 19:12 [PATCH 1/4] arm64: topology: Implement basic CPU topology support Mark Brown
2014-01-08 19:12 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-01-09 12:50   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-01-09 13:26     ` Mark Brown
2014-01-08 17:10 [PATCH 1/4] arm64: topology: Implement basic CPU topology support Mark Brown
2014-01-08 17:10 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2014-01-08 18:23   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-01-08 18:32     ` Mark Brown
2013-12-19 20:06 [PATCH 0/4] arm64 topology support Mark Brown
2013-12-19 20:06 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2013-12-16 16:49 [PATCH 1/4] arm64: topology: Implement basic CPU topology support Mark Brown
2013-12-16 16:49 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: topology: Add support for topology DT bindings Mark Brown
2013-12-17 17:40   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-12-17 19:19     ` Mark Brown

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=20140424144846.GB8191@red-moon \
    --to=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.