From: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
Dmitriy Cherkasov <dmitriy@oss-tech.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Otto Sabart <ottosabart@seberm.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Rob
Subject: [RFT/RFC PATCH v3 0/5] Unify CPU topology across ARM & RISC-V
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 16:48:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190320234806.19748-1-atish.patra@wdc.com> (raw)
The cpu-map DT entry in ARM can describe the CPU topology in much better
way compared to other existing approaches. RISC-V can easily adopt this
binding to represent its own CPU topology. Thus, both cpu-map DT
binding and topology parsing code can be moved to a common location so
that RISC-V or any other architecture can leverage that.
The relevant discussion regarding unifying cpu topology can be found in
[1].
arch_topology seems to be a perfect place to move the common code. I
have not introduced any significant functional changes in the moved code.
The only downside in this approach is that the capacity code will be
executed for RISC-V as well. But, it will exit immediately after not
able to find the appropriate DT node. If the overhead is considered too
much, we can always compile out capacity related functions under a
different config for the architectures that do not support them.
There was an opportunity to unify topology data structure for ARM32 done
by patch 3/4. But, I refrained from making any other changes as I am not
very well versed with original intention for some functions that
are present in arch_topology.c. I hope this patch series can be served
as a baseline for such changes in the future.
The patches have been tested for RISC-V and compile tested for ARM64,
ARM32 & x86.
The socket change[2] is also now part of this series.
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/6/19
[2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/7/918
QEMU changes for RISC-V topology are available at
https://github.com/atishp04/qemu/tree/riscv_topology_dt
HiFive Unleashed DT with topology node is available here.
https://github.com/atishp04/opensbi/tree/HiFive_unleashed_topology
It can be verified with OpenSBI with following additional compile time
option.
FW_PAYLOAD_FDT="unleashed_topology.dtb"
Changes from v2->v3
1. Cover letter update with experiment DT for topology changes.
2. Added the patch for [2].
Changes from v1->v2
1. ARM32 can now use the common code as well.
Atish Patra (4):
dt-binding: cpu-topology: Move cpu-map to a common binding.
cpu-topology: Move cpu topology code to common code.
arm: Use common cpu_topology
RISC-V: Parse cpu topology during boot.
Sudeep Holla (1):
Documentation: DT: arm: add support for sockets defining package
boundaries
.../topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt} | 134 ++++++--
arch/arm/include/asm/topology.h | 22 +-
arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 10 +-
arch/arm64/include/asm/topology.h | 23 --
arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 303 +-----------------
arch/riscv/Kconfig | 1 +
arch/riscv/kernel/smpboot.c | 3 +
drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 298 ++++++++++++++++-
drivers/base/topology.c | 1 +
include/linux/arch_topology.h | 36 +++
10 files changed, 453 insertions(+), 378 deletions(-)
rename Documentation/devicetree/bindings/{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt} (66%)
--
2.21.0
next reply other threads:[~2019-03-20 23:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-20 23:48 Atish Patra [this message]
2019-03-20 23:48 ` [RFT/RFC PATCH v3 1/5] Documentation: DT: arm: add support for sockets defining package boundaries Atish Patra
2019-03-20 23:48 ` [RFT/RFC PATCH v3 2/5] dt-binding: cpu-topology: Move cpu-map to a common binding Atish Patra
2019-03-24 21:16 ` Rob Herring
2019-03-20 23:48 ` [RFT/RFC PATCH v3 3/5] cpu-topology: Move cpu topology code to common code Atish Patra
2019-04-15 15:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-04-15 22:08 ` Atish Patra
2019-04-16 13:23 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-04-16 18:54 ` Atish Patra
2019-03-20 23:48 ` [RFT/RFC PATCH v3 4/5] arm: Use common cpu_topology Atish Patra
2019-04-15 15:31 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-04-15 21:16 ` Atish Patra
2019-04-16 13:09 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-04-16 19:04 ` Atish Patra
2019-03-20 23:48 ` [RFT/RFC PATCH v3 5/5] RISC-V: Parse cpu topology during boot Atish Patra
2019-04-10 22:49 ` [RFT/RFC PATCH v3 0/5] Unify CPU topology across ARM & RISC-V Atish Patra
2019-04-12 17:27 ` Sudeep Holla
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=20190320234806.19748-1-atish.patra@wdc.com \
--to=atish.patra@wdc.com \
--cc=anup@brainfault.org \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dmitriy@oss-tech.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=ottosabart@seberm.com \
--cc=palmer@sifive.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).