From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 11:43:20 +0000
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] Revert arm64 cache geometry
In-Reply-To: <20151029112914.GB28221@leverpostej>
References: <1446068637-11509-1-git-send-email-avanbrunt@nvidia.com>
 <20151029112914.GB28221@leverpostej>
Message-ID: <56320658.5090106@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org



On 29/10/15 11:29, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 02:43:54PM -0700, Alex Van Brunt wrote:
>> This patchset reverts three patches that attempt to query the CPU for cache
>> geometry and then make use of that information. Those patches rely on the
>> NumSets and LineSize fields of CCSIDR to determine the cache geometry. However,
>> the architectural documentation for these registers forbids such use:
>>
>> 	The parameters NumSets, Associativity, and LineSize in these registers
>> 	define the architecturally visible parameters that are required for the
>> 	cache maintenance by Set/Way instructions. They are not guaranteed to
>> 	represent the actual microarchitectural features of a design. You cannot
>> 	make any inference about the actual sizes of caches based on these
>> 	parameters.
>>
>> It is not just theoretical. For example, the Denver CPU will report one set and
>> one way in CCSIDR even though the actual microarchitectural implementation has
>> many sets and many ways.
>>
>> I have two suggestions for how to get the cache geometry on an ARMv8 processor:
>>    1. Specify the information in the device tree. The purpose of the deivce tree
>>       is to specify information that software cannot query at run-time. Becuase
>>       the architecture does not have an architectural way to query the cache
>>       geometry this may be a good fit.
>
> We already have to detect the unification of caches via DT, so the geomtery
> should probably live there too.
>

I agree with that and since we are already exposing cache geometry via
sysfs we need to override with values from DT if found instead of
reverting this completely, so that we don't break any user-space.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep