All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
To: "Hunt, David" <david.hunt@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] test: add checks for cpu flags on armv8
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:47:13 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151102131710.GA10385@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56373F59.6080602@intel.com>

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 10:47:53AM +0000, Hunt, David wrote:
> On 02/11/2015 06:32, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> >On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 04:28:25PM +0000, Hunt, David wrote:
>
> --snip--
>
> >
> >Hi Jan and Dave,
> >
> >I have reviewed your patches for arm[64] support. Please check the
> >review comments.
>
> Hi Jerin,
>
> I'm looking at the comments now, and working on getting the suggested
> changes merged into the patch-set.
>
> >Cavium would like to contribute on armv8 port and remaining libraries
> >(ACL, LPM, HASH) implementation for armv8. Currently i am re-basing
> >our ACL,HASH libraries implementation based on existing patches.
> >Happy to work with you guys to have full fledged armv8 support for DPDK.
> >
> >Jerin
>
> Thanks for that, it's good news indeed.
>
> >other query on rte_cpu_get_flag_enabled for armv8,
> >I have tried to run the existing patches on armv8-thunderX platform.
> >But there application start failure due to mismatch in
> >rte_cpu_get_flag_enabled() encoding.
> >
> >In my platform rte_cpu_get_flag_enabled() works based on
> >AT_HWCAP with following values[1] which different from
> >existing lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/arm/rte_cpuflags.h
> >
> >[1]http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/hwcap.h
> >
> >In order to debug this, Could provide the following
> >values in tested armv8 platform. Look like its running 32bit compatible
> >mode in your environment
>
> I'm using a Gigabyte MP30AR0 motherboard with an 8-core X-Gene, Running a
> 4.3.0-rc6 kernel.
> Here's the information on the cpu_flags issue you requested:
>
> >AT_SYSINFO_EHDR: 0x3ff859f0000
> >AT_??? (0x26): 0x430f0a10
> >AT_HWCAP:        fb
> >AT_PAGESZ:       65536
> >AT_CLKTCK:       100
> >AT_PHDR:         0x400040
> >AT_PHENT:        56
> >AT_PHNUM:        7
> >AT_BASE:         0x3ff85a00000
> >AT_FLAGS:        0x0
> >AT_ENTRY:        0x401900
> >AT_UID:          0
> >AT_EUID:         0
> >AT_GID:          0
> >AT_EGID:         0
> >AT_SECURE:       0
> >AT_RANDOM:       0x3ffef1c7988
> >AT_EXECFN:       /bin/sleep
> >AT_PLATFORM:     aarch64
>
> root@mp30ar0:~# LD_SHOW_AUXV=1 sleep 1000
> AT_SYSINFO_EHDR: 0x7f7956d000
> AT_HWCAP:        7
> AT_PAGESZ:       4096
> AT_CLKTCK:       100
> AT_PHDR:         0x400040
> AT_PHENT:        56
> AT_PHNUM:        7
> AT_BASE:         0x7f79543000
> AT_FLAGS:        0x0
> AT_ENTRY:        0x401900
> AT_UID:          0
> AT_EUID:         0
> AT_GID:          0
> AT_EGID:         0
> AT_SECURE:       0
> AT_RANDOM:       0x7ffcaf2e48
> AT_EXECFN:       /bin/sleep
> AT_PLATFORM:     aarch64
>

If am not wrong existing  rte_cpu_get_flag_enabled() implementation
should be broken in your platform also for arm64. as I could see only AT_HWCAP
not AT_HWCAP2 and AT_HWCAP is 0x7 that means your platform also
follows

http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/hwcap.h

and the implmentation is

FEAT_DEF(SWP,       0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  0) // not correct for arm64
FEAT_DEF(HALF,      0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  1) // not correct for arm64
FEAT_DEF(THUMB,     0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  2) // not correct for arm64
FEAT_DEF(A26BIT,    0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  3)
FEAT_DEF(FAST_MULT, 0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  4)
FEAT_DEF(FPA,       0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  5)
FEAT_DEF(VFP,       0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  6)
FEAT_DEF(EDSP,      0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  7)
FEAT_DEF(JAVA,      0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  8)
FEAT_DEF(IWMMXT,    0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  9)
FEAT_DEF(CRUNCH,    0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  10)
FEAT_DEF(THUMBEE,   0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  11)
FEAT_DEF(NEON,      0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  12)
FEAT_DEF(VFPv3,     0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  13)
FEAT_DEF(VFPv3D16,  0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  14)
FEAT_DEF(TLS,       0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  15)
FEAT_DEF(VFPv4,     0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  16)
FEAT_DEF(IDIVA,     0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  17)
FEAT_DEF(IDIVT,     0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  18)
FEAT_DEF(VFPD32,    0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  19)
FEAT_DEF(LPAE,      0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  20)
FEAT_DEF(EVTSTRM,   0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP,  21)
FEAT_DEF(AES,       0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP2,  0)
FEAT_DEF(PMULL,     0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP2,  1)
FEAT_DEF(SHA1,      0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP2,  2)
FEAT_DEF(SHA2,      0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP2,  3)
FEAT_DEF(CRC32,     0x00000001, 0, REG_HWCAP2,  4)
FEAT_DEF(AARCH32,   0x00000001, 0, REG_PLATFORM, 0)
FEAT_DEF(AARCH64,   0x00000001, 0, REG_PLATFORM, 1)

Am I missing something ?


> >root@arm64:/export/dpdk-arm64# zcat /proc/config.gz  | grep CONFIG_COMPAT
> ># CONFIG_COMPAT_BRK is not set
> >CONFIG_COMPAT_BINFMT_ELF=y
> >CONFIG_COMPAT=y
> >CONFIG_COMPAT_NETLINK_MESSAGES=y
>
> root@mp30ar0:~# zcat /proc/config.gz  | grep CONFIG_COMPAT
> # CONFIG_COMPAT_BRK is not set
> CONFIG_COMPAT_OLD_SIGACTION=y
> CONFIG_COMPAT_BINFMT_ELF=y
> CONFIG_COMPAT=y
>
>
> >root@arm64:/export/dpdk-arm64# cat /proc/cpuinfo
> >Processor       : AArch64 Processor rev 0 (aarch64)
> >processor       : 0
> >processor       : 1
> --snip--
> >processor       : 46
> >processor       : 47
> >Features        : fp asimd aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32
> >CPU implementer : 0x43
> >CPU architecture: AArch64
> >CPU variant     : 0x0
> >CPU part        : 0x0a1
> >CPU revision    : 0
>
> root@mp30ar0:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo
> processor       : 0
> Features        : fp asimd evtstrm
> CPU implementer : 0x50
> CPU architecture: 8
> CPU variant     : 0x0
> CPU part        : 0x000
> CPU revision    : 1
>
> processor       : 1
> Features        : fp asimd evtstrm
> CPU implementer : 0x50
> CPU architecture: 8
> CPU variant     : 0x0
> CPU part        : 0x000
> CPU revision    : 1
>
> processor       : 2
> Features        : fp asimd evtstrm
> CPU implementer : 0x50
> CPU architecture: 8
> CPU variant     : 0x0
> CPU part        : 0x000
> CPU revision    : 1
>
> processor       : 3
> Features        : fp asimd evtstrm
> CPU implementer : 0x50
> CPU architecture: 8
> CPU variant     : 0x0
> CPU part        : 0x000
> CPU revision    : 1
>
> processor       : 4
> Features        : fp asimd evtstrm
> CPU implementer : 0x50
> CPU architecture: 8
> CPU variant     : 0x0
> CPU part        : 0x000
> CPU revision    : 1
>
> processor       : 5
> Features        : fp asimd evtstrm
> CPU implementer : 0x50
> CPU architecture: 8
> CPU variant     : 0x0
> CPU part        : 0x000
> CPU revision    : 1
>
> processor       : 6
> Features        : fp asimd evtstrm
> CPU implementer : 0x50
> CPU architecture: 8
> CPU variant     : 0x0
> CPU part        : 0x000
> CPU revision    : 1
>
> processor       : 7
> Features        : fp asimd evtstrm
> CPU implementer : 0x50
> CPU architecture: 8
> CPU variant     : 0x0
> CPU part        : 0x000
> CPU revision    : 1
>
> root@mp30ar0:~#
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Regards,
> Dave.
>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-02 13:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1446212826-19425-7-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com>
     [not found] ` <5633798B.2050708@intel.com>
2015-10-30 16:11   ` [PATCH v3 6/6] test: add checks for cpu flags on armv8 Jan Viktorin
2015-10-30 16:16     ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-10-30 16:28     ` Hunt, David
2015-11-02  6:32       ` Jerin Jacob
2015-11-02 10:47         ` Hunt, David
2015-11-02 13:17           ` Jerin Jacob [this message]
2015-11-02 15:04             ` Hunt, David
2015-11-02 15:13               ` Jan Viktorin
2015-11-02 15:20                 ` Hunt, David
2015-11-02 15:24           ` Jan Viktorin
2015-10-30 13:49 [PATCH v3 0/6] ARMv8 additions to ARMv7 support David Hunt
2015-10-30 13:49 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] test: add checks for cpu flags on armv8 David Hunt

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=20151102131710.GA10385@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=david.hunt@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.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.