From: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com,
will.deacon@arm.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
linuxarm@huawei.com, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
john.garry@huawei.com, lenb@kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI/PPTT: Modify node flag detection to find last IDENTICAL
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 17:03:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190426220309.55654-4-jeremy.linton@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190426220309.55654-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
The ACPI specification implies that the IDENTICAL flag should be
set on all non leaf nodes where the children are identical.
This means that we need to be searching for the last node with
the identical flag set rather than the first one.
To achieve this with the existing code we need to pass a
function through the tree traversal logic so we can check
the next node to assure that IDENTICAL isn't set before returning
a node with IDENTICAL set.
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
---
drivers/acpi/pptt.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
index 1865515297ca..39f660d8be0a 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
@@ -432,17 +432,51 @@ static void cache_setup_acpi_cpu(struct acpi_table_header *table,
}
}
+
+typedef bool (*node_check)(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
+ struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu);
+static bool flag_package(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
+ struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu)
+{
+ return cpu->flags & ACPI_PPTT_PHYSICAL_PACKAGE;
+}
+
+static bool flag_identical(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
+ struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu)
+{
+ struct acpi_pptt_processor *next;
+
+ /* heterogeneous machines must use PPTT revision > 1 */
+ if (table_hdr->revision < 2)
+ return false;
+
+ /* Locate the last node in the tree with IDENTICAL set */
+ if (cpu->flags & ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_IDENTICAL) {
+ next = fetch_pptt_node(table_hdr, cpu->parent);
+ if (!(next && next->flags & ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_IDENTICAL))
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return false;
+}
+
+static bool flag_none(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
+ struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu)
+{
+ return false;
+}
+
/* Passing level values greater than this will result in search termination */
#define PPTT_ABORT_PACKAGE 0xFF
-static struct acpi_pptt_processor *acpi_find_processor_package_id(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
- struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu,
- int level, int flag)
+static struct acpi_pptt_processor *acpi_find_processor_tag_id(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
+ struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu,
+ int level, node_check chk)
{
struct acpi_pptt_processor *prev_node;
while (cpu && level) {
- if (cpu->flags & flag)
+ if (chk(table_hdr, cpu))
break;
pr_debug("level %d\n", level);
prev_node = fetch_pptt_node(table_hdr, cpu->parent);
@@ -473,15 +507,15 @@ static void acpi_pptt_warn_missing(void)
* Return: Unique value, or -ENOENT if unable to locate CPU
*/
static int topology_get_acpi_cpu_tag(struct acpi_table_header *table,
- unsigned int cpu, int level, int flag)
+ unsigned int cpu, int level, node_check chk)
{
struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu_node;
u32 acpi_cpu_id = get_acpi_id_for_cpu(cpu);
cpu_node = acpi_find_processor_node(table, acpi_cpu_id);
if (cpu_node) {
- cpu_node = acpi_find_processor_package_id(table, cpu_node,
- level, flag);
+ cpu_node = acpi_find_processor_tag_id(table, cpu_node,
+ level, chk);
/*
* As per specification if the processor structure represents
* an actual processor, then ACPI processor ID must be valid.
@@ -498,7 +532,7 @@ static int topology_get_acpi_cpu_tag(struct acpi_table_header *table,
return -ENOENT;
}
-static int find_acpi_cpu_topology_tag(unsigned int cpu, int level, int flag)
+static int find_acpi_cpu_topology_tag(unsigned int cpu, int level, node_check chk)
{
struct acpi_table_header *table;
acpi_status status;
@@ -509,7 +543,7 @@ static int find_acpi_cpu_topology_tag(unsigned int cpu, int level, int flag)
acpi_pptt_warn_missing();
return -ENOENT;
}
- retval = topology_get_acpi_cpu_tag(table, cpu, level, flag);
+ retval = topology_get_acpi_cpu_tag(table, cpu, level, chk);
pr_debug("Topology Setup ACPI CPU %d, level %d ret = %d\n",
cpu, level, retval);
acpi_put_table(table);
@@ -601,7 +635,7 @@ int cache_setup_acpi(unsigned int cpu)
*/
int find_acpi_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpu, int level)
{
- return find_acpi_cpu_topology_tag(cpu, level, 0);
+ return find_acpi_cpu_topology_tag(cpu, level, flag_none);
}
/**
@@ -658,7 +692,7 @@ int find_acpi_cpu_cache_topology(unsigned int cpu, int level)
int find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(unsigned int cpu)
{
return find_acpi_cpu_topology_tag(cpu, PPTT_ABORT_PACKAGE,
- ACPI_PPTT_PHYSICAL_PACKAGE);
+ flag_package);
}
/**
@@ -670,8 +704,8 @@ int find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(unsigned int cpu)
*
* The returned tag can be used to group peers with identical implementation.
*
- * The search terminates when a level is found with the identical implementation
- * flag set or we reach a root node.
+ * The search terminates when a level is found without the identical
+ * implementation flag set following a node with it set, or we reach the root.
*
* Due to limitations in the PPTT data structure, there may be rare situations
* where two cores in a heterogeneous machine may be identical, but won't have
@@ -684,5 +718,5 @@ int find_acpi_cpu_topology_package(unsigned int cpu)
int find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(unsigned int cpu)
{
return find_acpi_cpu_topology_tag(cpu, PPTT_ABORT_PACKAGE,
- ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_IDENTICAL);
+ flag_identical);
}
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
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:[~2019-04-26 22:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-26 22:03 [PATCH v2 0/5] arm64: SPE ACPI enablement Jeremy Linton
2019-04-26 22:03 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] ACPI/PPTT: Trivial, Modify the case of CPU Jeremy Linton
2019-04-29 8:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-05-01 15:46 ` Jeremy Linton
2019-05-06 12:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-04-26 22:03 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] ACPI/PPTT: Add function to return ACPI 6.3 Identical tokens Jeremy Linton
2019-04-26 22:03 ` Jeremy Linton [this message]
2019-04-29 8:59 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] ACPI/PPTT: Modify node flag detection to find last IDENTICAL Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-05-01 16:23 ` Jeremy Linton
2019-04-26 22:03 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] arm_pmu: acpi: spe: Add initial MADT/SPE probing Jeremy Linton
2019-04-26 22:03 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] perf: arm_spe: Enable ACPI/Platform automatic module loading Jeremy Linton
2019-05-01 14:15 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] arm64: SPE ACPI enablement Will Deacon
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=20190426220309.55654-4-jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--to=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox