From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
sudeep.holla@arm.com, hanjun.guo@linaro.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
will.deacon@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, jhugo@codeaurora.org,
wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com, Jonathan.Zhang@cavium.com,
ahs3@redhat.com, Jayachandran.Nair@cavium.com,
austinwc@codeaurora.org, lenb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 8/9] arm64: topology: Enable ACPI/PPTT based CPU topology.
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 18:22:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171213182219.GC4060@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171201222330.18863-9-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Nit: remove the period in $SUBJECT and capitalize with a coherent
policy for the patches touching the same code.
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:23:29PM -0600, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> Propagate the topology information from the PPTT tree to the
> cpu_topology array. We can get the thread id, core_id and
> cluster_id by assuming certain levels of the PPTT tree correspond
> to those concepts. The package_id is flagged in the tree and can be
> found by calling find_acpi_cpu_topology_package() which terminates
> its search when it finds an ACPI node flagged as the physical
> package. If the tree doesn't contain enough levels to represent
> all of the requested levels then the root node will be returned
> for all subsequent levels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> include/linux/topology.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> index 74a8a5173a35..198714aca9e8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> * for more details.
> */
>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> #include <linux/arch_topology.h>
> #include <linux/cpu.h>
> #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> @@ -22,6 +23,7 @@
> #include <linux/sched.h>
> #include <linux/sched/topology.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/smp.h>
> #include <linux/string.h>
>
> #include <asm/cpu.h>
> @@ -300,6 +302,47 @@ static void __init reset_cpu_topology(void)
> }
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +/*
> + * Propagate the topology information of the processor_topology_node tree to the
> + * cpu_topology array.
> + */
> +static int __init parse_acpi_topology(void)
> +{
> + u64 is_threaded;
Nit: a bool would be preferable.
> + int cpu;
> + int topology_id;
int cpu, topology_id;
> + is_threaded = read_cpuid_mpidr() & MPIDR_MT_BITMASK;
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + topology_id = find_acpi_cpu_topology(cpu, 0);
> + if (topology_id < 0)
> + return topology_id;
> +
> + if (is_threaded) {
> + cpu_topology[cpu].thread_id = topology_id;
> + topology_id = find_acpi_cpu_topology(cpu, 1);
> + cpu_topology[cpu].core_id = topology_id;
> + topology_id = find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(cpu);
> + cpu_topology[cpu].physical_id = topology_id;
> + } else {
> + cpu_topology[cpu].thread_id = -1;
> + cpu_topology[cpu].core_id = topology_id;
> + topology_id = find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(cpu);
> + cpu_topology[cpu].physical_id = topology_id;
> + }
> + }
Add a space.
It is probably my fault so apologies if that's the case. The
find_acpi_cpu_topology()
API is a bit strange since it behaves differently according to the
level passed in.
I think it is better to define two calls (it might well have been like
that in one of the previous series versions):
- find_acpi_cpu_package_level() (returns: package level if success, <0 on
failure)
- acpi_cpu_topology_id()
It would even be better to lump the two calls together but you do not
know how many topology levels are there so it becomes a bit complicated
to handle.
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#else
> +static int __init parse_acpi_topology(void)
static inline ?
> +{
> + /*ACPI kernels should be built with PPTT support*/
I think you can remove this comment.
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +#endif
>
> void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
> {
> @@ -309,6 +352,8 @@ void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
> * Discard anything that was parsed if we hit an error so we
> * don't use partial information.
> */
> - if (of_have_populated_dt() && parse_dt_topology())
> + if ((!acpi_disabled) && parse_acpi_topology())
> + reset_cpu_topology();
> + else if (of_have_populated_dt() && parse_dt_topology())
> reset_cpu_topology();
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/topology.h b/include/linux/topology.h
> index cb0775e1ee4b..170ce87edd88 100644
> --- a/include/linux/topology.h
> +++ b/include/linux/topology.h
> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@
> if (nr_cpus_node(node))
>
> int arch_update_cpu_topology(void);
> +int find_acpi_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpu, int level);
> +int find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(unsigned int cpu);
I do not think these two declarations:
a) belong in this patch
b) belong in include/linux/topology.h (should be acpi.h)
Lorenzo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com (Lorenzo Pieralisi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v5 8/9] arm64: topology: Enable ACPI/PPTT based CPU topology.
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 18:22:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171213182219.GC4060@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171201222330.18863-9-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Nit: remove the period in $SUBJECT and capitalize with a coherent
policy for the patches touching the same code.
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:23:29PM -0600, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> Propagate the topology information from the PPTT tree to the
> cpu_topology array. We can get the thread id, core_id and
> cluster_id by assuming certain levels of the PPTT tree correspond
> to those concepts. The package_id is flagged in the tree and can be
> found by calling find_acpi_cpu_topology_package() which terminates
> its search when it finds an ACPI node flagged as the physical
> package. If the tree doesn't contain enough levels to represent
> all of the requested levels then the root node will be returned
> for all subsequent levels.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> include/linux/topology.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> index 74a8a5173a35..198714aca9e8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> * for more details.
> */
>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> #include <linux/arch_topology.h>
> #include <linux/cpu.h>
> #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> @@ -22,6 +23,7 @@
> #include <linux/sched.h>
> #include <linux/sched/topology.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/smp.h>
> #include <linux/string.h>
>
> #include <asm/cpu.h>
> @@ -300,6 +302,47 @@ static void __init reset_cpu_topology(void)
> }
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +/*
> + * Propagate the topology information of the processor_topology_node tree to the
> + * cpu_topology array.
> + */
> +static int __init parse_acpi_topology(void)
> +{
> + u64 is_threaded;
Nit: a bool would be preferable.
> + int cpu;
> + int topology_id;
int cpu, topology_id;
> + is_threaded = read_cpuid_mpidr() & MPIDR_MT_BITMASK;
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> + topology_id = find_acpi_cpu_topology(cpu, 0);
> + if (topology_id < 0)
> + return topology_id;
> +
> + if (is_threaded) {
> + cpu_topology[cpu].thread_id = topology_id;
> + topology_id = find_acpi_cpu_topology(cpu, 1);
> + cpu_topology[cpu].core_id = topology_id;
> + topology_id = find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(cpu);
> + cpu_topology[cpu].physical_id = topology_id;
> + } else {
> + cpu_topology[cpu].thread_id = -1;
> + cpu_topology[cpu].core_id = topology_id;
> + topology_id = find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(cpu);
> + cpu_topology[cpu].physical_id = topology_id;
> + }
> + }
Add a space.
It is probably my fault so apologies if that's the case. The
find_acpi_cpu_topology()
API is a bit strange since it behaves differently according to the
level passed in.
I think it is better to define two calls (it might well have been like
that in one of the previous series versions):
- find_acpi_cpu_package_level() (returns: package level if success, <0 on
failure)
- acpi_cpu_topology_id()
It would even be better to lump the two calls together but you do not
know how many topology levels are there so it becomes a bit complicated
to handle.
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#else
> +static int __init parse_acpi_topology(void)
static inline ?
> +{
> + /*ACPI kernels should be built with PPTT support*/
I think you can remove this comment.
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +#endif
>
> void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
> {
> @@ -309,6 +352,8 @@ void __init init_cpu_topology(void)
> * Discard anything that was parsed if we hit an error so we
> * don't use partial information.
> */
> - if (of_have_populated_dt() && parse_dt_topology())
> + if ((!acpi_disabled) && parse_acpi_topology())
> + reset_cpu_topology();
> + else if (of_have_populated_dt() && parse_dt_topology())
> reset_cpu_topology();
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/topology.h b/include/linux/topology.h
> index cb0775e1ee4b..170ce87edd88 100644
> --- a/include/linux/topology.h
> +++ b/include/linux/topology.h
> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@
> if (nr_cpus_node(node))
>
> int arch_update_cpu_topology(void);
> +int find_acpi_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpu, int level);
> +int find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(unsigned int cpu);
I do not think these two declarations:
a) belong in this patch
b) belong in include/linux/topology.h (should be acpi.h)
Lorenzo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-13 18:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 113+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-01 22:23 [PATCH v5 0/9] Support PPTT for ARM64 Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 1/9] arm64/acpi: Create arch specific cpu to acpi id helper Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 2/9] ACPI/PPTT: Add Processor Properties Topology Table parsing Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 1:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 1:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 3/9] ACPI: Enable PPTT support on ARM64 Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-13 17:26 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2017-12-13 17:26 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2018-01-05 21:58 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-05 21:58 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-05 22:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-05 22:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 4/9] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI based firmware tables Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 1:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 1:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 17:03 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 17:03 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 17:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 17:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 17:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 22:55 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 22:55 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 22:55 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 23:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 23:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 23:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 23:37 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 23:37 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 23:37 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 23:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 23:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 23:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-03 14:21 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-03 14:21 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-03 14:21 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-04 11:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-04 11:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-04 11:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 5/9] arm64: " Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 6/9] ACPI/PPTT: Add topology parsing code Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 1:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 1:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-12 16:13 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-12 16:13 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-13 17:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2017-12-13 17:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2017-12-13 22:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-13 22:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-13 22:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-13 23:06 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-13 23:06 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-13 23:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-13 23:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-12-13 23:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-03 8:49 ` vkilari
2018-01-03 8:49 ` vkilari
2018-01-03 8:49 ` vkilari at codeaurora.org
2018-01-03 16:57 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-03 16:57 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-03 16:57 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-04 6:48 ` vkilari
2018-01-04 6:48 ` vkilari
2018-01-04 6:48 ` vkilari at codeaurora.org
2018-01-04 17:50 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-04 17:50 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-04 17:50 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 7/9] arm64: Topology, rename cluster_id Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-13 18:02 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2017-12-13 18:02 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2017-12-15 16:36 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-15 16:36 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-18 12:42 ` Morten Rasmussen
2017-12-18 12:42 ` Morten Rasmussen
2017-12-18 15:47 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2017-12-18 15:47 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2017-12-19 9:38 ` Morten Rasmussen
2017-12-19 9:38 ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-01-02 2:29 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-02 2:29 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-02 2:29 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-02 11:30 ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-01-02 11:30 ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-01-03 14:29 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-03 14:29 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-03 17:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-03 17:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-03 17:43 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-03 17:43 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-04 3:59 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-04 3:59 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-04 3:59 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-04 18:00 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-04 18:00 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-04 4:14 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-04 4:14 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-04 4:14 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 8/9] arm64: topology: Enable ACPI/PPTT based CPU topology Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-13 18:22 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2017-12-13 18:22 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2017-12-15 17:42 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-15 17:42 ` Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` [PATCH v5 9/9] ACPI: Add PPTT to injectable table list Jeremy Linton
2017-12-01 22:23 ` Jeremy Linton
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=20171213182219.GC4060@red-moon \
--to=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=Jayachandran.Nair@cavium.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Zhang@cavium.com \
--cc=ahs3@redhat.com \
--cc=austinwc@codeaurora.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=jhugo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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.