From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753697AbbBXSJJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:09:09 -0500 Received: from service87.mimecast.com ([91.220.42.44]:55388 "EHLO service87.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753673AbbBXSJG convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:09:06 -0500 Message-ID: <54ECBE4D.6050608@arm.com> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 18:09:17 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Borislav Petkov CC: Sudeep Holla , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , "x86@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v2] x86: move cacheinfo sysfs to generic cacheinfo infrastructure References: <1420703406-10637-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1424715265-21407-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20150224175749.GC3575@pd.tnic> In-Reply-To: <20150224175749.GC3575@pd.tnic> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2015 18:09:02.0856 (UTC) FILETIME=[F8689080:01D0505C] X-MC-Unique: 115022418090300201 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Boris, On 24/02/15 17:57, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 06:14:25PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> - Rebased on v4.0-rc1 >> - Fixed lockdep warning reported by Borislav > > You probably have fixed the lockdep splat but not the NULL pointer > dereference which was there in the first mail I sent you. I'd suggest > you find an AMD box with an L3 and do some testing yourself before > sending out another version. > Sorry for the trouble and thanks for giving it a try. OK I will try to find one, but it may be difficult to grab one. > Also, when testing, do a snapshot of the sysfs cache hierarchy by doing: > > grep . -EriIn /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cache/* > Yes I have checked it on x86. > before your changes and after and check for differences. > And they are exactly same. > We can't allow ourselves any differences because this is an API. > As I mentioned to Ingo in the other email, that shouldn't happen as generic code is almost based on existing x86 implementation. It was moved to avoid further duplication while adding support to arm/arm64 and also to consolidate multiple existing duplicate implementations (x86, ia64, s390 and ppc) Regards, Sudeep