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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7667C43143 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 15:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4CA20666 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 15:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="Ic30rvzU"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="Bpectid+" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5B4CA20666 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727166AbeJBWOP (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2018 18:14:15 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:40990 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726330AbeJBWOP (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2018 18:14:15 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 128E660BE3; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 15:30:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1538494218; bh=9vd8EC7ote16UQGv5mOp++0wUJJ2DzeGDUV8jUBJD/0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Ic30rvzUOAq+WJwtFWnjs7wFyE1ySjqu2iZrwjaAub9+6XNoKl/ixkl3yIZDyHkg9 Ye3ZootsZdGt0w/qVdndrVWQk4VCEU5+jOLKQ5GTSIMRbUjqa+VM11DkAUZFK8+hJK N3+Lfo9bJhOidlyvRfVdaifa3pv1LB5kcJgSgO9I= Received: from [10.226.60.81] (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jhugo@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BBAC860242; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 15:30:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1538494217; bh=9vd8EC7ote16UQGv5mOp++0wUJJ2DzeGDUV8jUBJD/0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Bpectid+o5ixaAmD3Qlh3Ny2enrt2FxbbRHn3FHJJ7LNjQt1onDNynSTfiATtahDO dhwWBIeFq4JnWAZ3j1WsOToo1pZxs45q4Xp/JemVd1TI21APJlc7O4rLWCm6GXPUHy cn/G3ruedxZYNzMvfmxPTQ9ByTUw/phbDlgF4+wQ= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org BBAC860242 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=jhugo@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ACPI/PPTT: Handle architecturally unknown cache types To: Sudeep Holla Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, jeremy.linton@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vkilari@codeaurora.org References: <1538103477-15513-1-git-send-email-jhugo@codeaurora.org> <1538103477-15513-3-git-send-email-jhugo@codeaurora.org> <20181002105705.GB1086@e107155-lin> From: Jeffrey Hugo Message-ID: <84bcc957-6833-a7be-21e2-42014a7e0fd1@codeaurora.org> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 09:30:16 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181002105705.GB1086@e107155-lin> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/2/2018 4:57 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 08:57:57PM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: >> The type of a cache might not be specified by architectural mechanisms (ie >> system registers), but its type might be specified in the PPTT. In this >> case, we should populate the type of the cache, rather than leave it >> undefined. >> >> This fixes the issue where the cacheinfo driver will not populate sysfs >> for such caches, resulting in the information missing from utilities like >> lstopo and lscpu, thus degrading the user experience. >> >> Fixes: 2bd00bcd73e5 (ACPI/PPTT: Add Processor Properties Topology Table parsing) >> Reported-by: Vijaya Kumar K >> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo >> --- >> drivers/acpi/pptt.c | 30 +++++++++++++----------------- >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c >> index d1e26cb..38ac30e 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c >> @@ -357,25 +357,15 @@ static void update_cache_properties(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, >> struct acpi_pptt_cache *found_cache, >> struct acpi_pptt_processor *cpu_node) >> { >> - int valid_flags = 0; >> - >> this_leaf->fw_token = cpu_node; >> - if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_SIZE_PROPERTY_VALID) { >> + if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_SIZE_PROPERTY_VALID) >> this_leaf->size = found_cache->size; >> - valid_flags++; >> - } >> - if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_LINE_SIZE_VALID) { >> + if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_LINE_SIZE_VALID) >> this_leaf->coherency_line_size = found_cache->line_size; >> - valid_flags++; >> - } >> - if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_NUMBER_OF_SETS_VALID) { >> + if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_NUMBER_OF_SETS_VALID) >> this_leaf->number_of_sets = found_cache->number_of_sets; >> - valid_flags++; >> - } >> - if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_ASSOCIATIVITY_VALID) { >> + if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_ASSOCIATIVITY_VALID) >> this_leaf->ways_of_associativity = found_cache->associativity; >> - valid_flags++; >> - } >> if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_WRITE_POLICY_VALID) { >> switch (found_cache->attributes & ACPI_PPTT_MASK_WRITE_POLICY) { >> case ACPI_PPTT_CACHE_POLICY_WT: >> @@ -402,11 +392,17 @@ static void update_cache_properties(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, >> } >> } >> /* >> - * If the above flags are valid, and the cache type is NOCACHE >> - * update the cache type as well. >> + * If cache type is NOCACHE, then the cache hasn't been specified >> + * via other mechanisms. Update the type if a cache type has been >> + * provided. >> + * >> + * Note, we assume such caches are unified based on conventional system >> + * design and known examples. Significant work is required elsewhere to >> + * fully support data/instruction only type caches which are only >> + * specified in PPTT. >> */ >> if (this_leaf->type == CACHE_TYPE_NOCACHE && >> - valid_flags == PPTT_CHECKED_ATTRIBUTES) > > I don't think we use PPTT_CHECKED_ATTRIBUTES elsewhere. > If so, can we drop that ? > > Other than that: > Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla Whoops, you are right. For some reason I thought that came from the standard ACPICA definitions. Let me drop that. -- Jeffrey Hugo Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.