From: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>, sudeep.holla@arm.com
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
hanjun.guo@linaro.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com,
rjw@rjwysocki.net, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
viresh.kumar@linaro.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
jhugo@codeaurora.org, wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com,
Jonathan.Zhang@cavium.com, ahs3@redhat.com,
Jayachandran.Nair@cavium.com, austinwc@codeaurora.org,
lenb@kernel.org, vkilari@codeaurora.org,
morten.rasmussen@arm.com, albert@sifive.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:26:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d5642e55-9a37-538d-3c6d-226dd22ce64e@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-72d1934a-43df-4a5b-851d-0dd6d8a1b30b@palmer-si-x1c4>
Hi,
On 01/15/2018 10:07 AM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 04:33:38 PST (-0800), sudeep.holla@arm.com wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 06:59:10PM -0600, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>> The original intent in cacheinfo was that an architecture
>>> specific populate_cache_leaves() would probe the hardware
>>> and then cache_shared_cpu_map_setup() and
>>> cache_override_properties() would provide firmware help to
>>> extend/expand upon what was probed. Arm64 was really
>>> the only architecture that was working this way, and
>>> with the removal of most of the hardware probing logic it
>>> became clear that it was possible to simplify the logic a bit.
>>>
>>> This patch combines the walk of the DT nodes with the
>>> code updating the cache size/line_size and nr_sets.
>>> cache_override_properties() (which was DT specific) is
>>> then removed. The result is that cacheinfo.of_node is
>>> no longer used as a temporary place to hold DT references
>>> for future calls that update cache properties. That change
>>> helps to clarify its one remaining use (matching
>>> cacheinfo nodes that represent shared caches) which
>>> will be used by the ACPI/PPTT code in the following patches.
>>>
>>> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
>>> Cc: Albert Ou <albert@sifive.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 1 +
>>> drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 65
>>> +++++++++++++++++++------------------------
>>> include/linux/cacheinfo.h | 1 +
>>> 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>>> b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>>> index 10ed2749e246..6f4500233cf8 100644
>>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>>> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ static void ci_leaf_init(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
>>> CACHE_WRITE_BACK
>>> | CACHE_READ_ALLOCATE
>>> | CACHE_WRITE_ALLOCATE;
>>> + cache_of_set_props(this_leaf, node);
>>
>> This may be necessary but can it be done as later patch ? So far nothing
>> is added that may break riscv IIUC.
>>
>> Palmer, Albert,
>>
>> Can you confirm ? Also, as I see we can thin down arch specific
>> implementation on riscv if it's just using DT like ARM64. Sorry if
>> I am missing to see something, so thought of checking.
>>
>> [...]
>
> Sorry, I guess I'm a bit confused as to what's going on here. RISC-V
> uses device tree on all Linux systems.
If I'm understanding the context correctly:
The first part of this patch set just straightens out the DT setup order
so it happens in a single pass (rather that doing one pass to find the
DT nodes, then another later on to update the cacheinfo from DT). This
clarifies/simplifies how the firmware_unique (firmware_token?) field in
cacheinfo is actually being used.
riscv is a bit odd because its actually doing some DT manipulation in
its arch setup (populate_cache_leaves()). I think the thought process is
that it might be nicer if the common DT code handled whatever required
that bit of logic to be added to riscv. If that were changed, then it
might be possible to drop most of the DT cache setup code from the
riscv/arch tree.
>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/cacheinfo.h b/include/linux/cacheinfo.h
>>> index 3d9805297cda..d35299a590a4 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/cacheinfo.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/cacheinfo.h
>>> @@ -99,6 +99,7 @@ int func(unsigned int cpu) \
>>> struct cpu_cacheinfo *get_cpu_cacheinfo(unsigned int cpu);
>>> int init_cache_level(unsigned int cpu);
>>> int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu);
>>> +void cache_of_set_props(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct
>>> device_node *np);
>>>
>>
>> IIUC riscv is the only user for this outside of cacheinfo.c, right ?
>> Hopefully we can get rid of it.
>>
>> Other than that, it looks OK. I will wait for response from riscv team
>> do that these riscv related changes can be dropped or move to later
>> patch if really needed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-16 21:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-13 0:59 [PATCH v6 00/12] Support PPTT for ARM64 Jeremy Linton
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 01/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: move cache_setup_of_node() Jeremy Linton
2018-01-15 12:23 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early Jeremy Linton
2018-01-15 12:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-15 16:07 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-01-16 21:26 ` Jeremy Linton [this message]
2018-01-17 18:08 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-18 17:36 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-01-16 21:07 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-17 18:20 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-17 18:51 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-18 10:14 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-19 23:27 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 03/12] cacheinfo: rename of_node to fw_unique Jeremy Linton
2018-01-15 12:36 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 04/12] arm64/acpi: Create arch specific cpu to acpi id helper Jeremy Linton
2018-01-15 13:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 05/12] ACPI/PPTT: Add Processor Properties Topology Table parsing Jeremy Linton
2018-01-15 14:58 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-16 20:55 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-17 17:58 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-15 15:48 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-16 20:22 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-17 18:00 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 06/12] ACPI: Enable PPTT support on ARM64 Jeremy Linton
2018-01-15 13:52 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 07/12] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI based firmware tables Jeremy Linton
2018-01-15 15:06 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-22 15:50 ` Greg KH
2018-01-22 21:14 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-23 0:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 08/12] arm64: " Jeremy Linton
2018-01-15 13:54 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 09/12] ACPI/PPTT: Add topology parsing code Jeremy Linton
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 10/12] arm64: topology: rename cluster_id Jeremy Linton
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 11/12] arm64: topology: enable ACPI/PPTT based CPU topology Jeremy Linton
2018-01-25 12:15 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-01-25 15:56 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-01-26 4:21 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-02-23 11:02 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2018-02-24 3:05 ` Xiongfeng Wang
2018-02-25 6:17 ` vkilari
2018-03-01 14:19 ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-02-24 4:37 ` Jeremy Linton
2018-03-01 11:51 ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-01-13 0:59 ` [PATCH v6 12/12] ACPI: Add PPTT to injectable table list Jeremy Linton
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=d5642e55-9a37-538d-3c6d-226dd22ce64e@arm.com \
--to=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=Jayachandran.Nair@cavium.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Zhang@cavium.com \
--cc=ahs3@redhat.com \
--cc=albert@sifive.com \
--cc=austinwc@codeaurora.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=jhugo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=palmer@sifive.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=vkilari@codeaurora.org \
--cc=wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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