From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 398B1C53210 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 18:53:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:Content-Type: List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date :Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=DnUDLJKq+Kcx2l95/+GdyLfk9eI0V8p/JuechVdUC1Q=; b=kW8oZalI0aC4Tb1DeU6ICjq9Vx OWaGhzHzRv4BxEXq3oOD1xUJohPp18uw48XHypVSpdWoqjuQ/CQRfS3Vt+tNUGZNHYyIA2s+uiq4c 4vhj9XdCpq7n2nEsAsNElnrO+D0fhonGhYePyIMK0ZOux+51xBlPL534BT9B0lMX2GJKZvd++67eP 2NSpzszLi3uIg/RcrK5ud8cG2vqwjjQpIQpd3namn3jyj+O1JRw0TcRERcv4H1uhPZ9jHnwE8ctJX yjh1bzOiPFANNsZw+YrNjD5unJ90Q2qSUdmaynFV/lNEfkzGPS9SEWmjCjZnMjXdv8gATmMgCdDr7 yNrk2kRA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1pCmPD-0045bY-T0; Tue, 03 Jan 2023 18:52:59 +0000 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org ([145.40.68.75]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1pCklS-003FFb-V6 for linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 03 Jan 2023 17:07:56 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8ED9B81047; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 17:07:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CEDCCC433D2; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 17:07:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1672765663; bh=UGU0wQk5Rz5vpjfRCrgvNQs/jjE9iD1PMT5uCeHYMMM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=h0uNLLry+2HwoJmCXdR6Z42NvUWGrrgkKdsrP2OJcwlJE512QrP/hlGqRBc+QjhZH q6plqSawA0hKQwDKO4I2qVkuAcgltCtbGFpzU4UzZb7gAcUq5ubJ/xZGpnWdiSptvj WTdrFwfe4dIe+FzDvqhA/cyZLegojGc1AO/pA0DiLz2stvw6nPQ5rhYRtkkbkba6yq 9YXeqVeC3Mkmy7BrnA5OknE/j8z8TxYvZzUFu8Cis+ypV93aWDzTMlvpOo1KS5ktvj GLL2oAElQ41l6ziZ2+FdLLjmtXOD1bCjPqh6SndEfkNRc/YR+sTUaD8FsLmiLFA8BN 4AHJU6bxU/r+g== Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 17:07:39 +0000 From: Conor Dooley To: Leyfoon Tan , Sudeep Holla Cc: Andrew Jones , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , Albert Ou , "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Ley Foon Tan Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: Move call to init_cpu_topology() to later initialization stage Message-ID: References: <20230103035316.3841303-1-leyfoon.tan@starfivetech.com> <20230103065411.2l7k6r57v4phrnos@orel> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20230103_090752_615838_1F169413 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 30.93 ) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0308217207739986338==" Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org --===============0308217207739986338== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bFhWM6tuHAs59VuW" Content-Disposition: inline --bFhWM6tuHAs59VuW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello! Couple comments for you. +CC Sudeep: I've got a question for you below. On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 07:53:38AM +0000, Leyfoon Tan wrote: > > From: Andrew Jones > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: Move call to init_cpu_topology() to later > > initialization stage > > On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 11:53:16AM +0800, Ley Foon Tan wrote: > > > topology_parse_cpu_capacity() is failed to allocate memory with > > > kcalloc() after read "capacity-dmips-mhz" DT parameter in CPU DT Uhh, so where did this "capacity-dmips-mhz" property actually come from? I had a quick check of qemu with grep & I don't see anything there that would add this property. This property should not be valid on anything other than arm AFAICT. > > > nodes. This > > > topology_parse_cpu_capacity() is called from init_cpu_topology(), move > > > call to init_cpu_topology() to later initialization stage (after > > > memory allocation is available). > > > > > > Note, this refers to ARM64 implementation, call init_cpu_topology() in > > > smp_prepare_cpus(). > > > > > > Tested on Qemu platform. > >=20 > > Hi Ley, > >=20 > > Can you provide the topologies (command lines) tested? > 2 clusters with 2 CPU cores each. What's the actual commandline for this? I'm not the best with QEMU, so it'd really be appreciated, given the above. > > > Signed-off-by: Ley Foon Tan > >=20 > > Fixes tag? > Okay, will send out next revision with Fixes tag. Please don't just send versions to add tags, Palmer can pick them up if/when he applies the patch. > Fixes: 03f11f03dbfe ("RISC-V: Parse cpu topology during boot. ") > > > arch/riscv/kernel/smpboot.c | 3 ++- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/smpboot.c > > > index 3373df413c88..ddb2afba6d25 100644 > > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/smpboot.c > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/smpboot.c > > > @@ -39,7 +39,6 @@ static DECLARE_COMPLETION(cpu_running); > > > > > > void __init smp_prepare_boot_cpu(void) { > > > - init_cpu_topology(); > > > } > > > > > > void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus) @@ -48,6 +47,8 > > @@ > > > void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus) > > > int ret; > > > unsigned int curr_cpuid; > > > > > > + init_cpu_topology(); I know arm64 does this, but there is any real reason for us to do so? @Sudeep, do you know why arm64 calls that each time? Or if it is worth "saving" that call on riscv, since arm64 is clearly happily calling it for many years & calling it later would likely head off a good few allocation issues (like the one we saw with the topology reworking a few months ago). Thanks, Conor. > > > + > > > curr_cpuid =3D smp_processor_id(); > > > store_cpu_topology(curr_cpuid); > > > numa_store_cpu_info(curr_cpuid); > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 > > > > >=20 > > Otherwise, > >=20 > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones --bFhWM6tuHAs59VuW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCY7RgvQAKCRB4tDGHoIJi 0jhvAPwPJ7Hk0k4PcWgouMMd1dWjyjc6Brvu/ySku6YDn2yYQQD/d1s8Kfw0bmSy Gly1ylo9G9DKJfyp8U6AnamulIqamQI= =5tyW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bFhWM6tuHAs59VuW-- --===============0308217207739986338== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv --===============0308217207739986338==--