Re: [PATCH V4 08/23] RISC-V: ACPI: Cache and retrieve the RINTC structure

Andrew Jones
2023-04-27T13:13:17Z

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 04:22:56PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 12:25:42PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 02:52:50PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> > > Hi Palmer,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 11:45:00AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 04 Apr 2023 11:20:22 PDT (-0700), sunilvl@ventanamicro.com wrote:
> > > > > RINTC structures in the MADT provide mapping between the hartid
> > > > > and the CPU. This is required many times even at run time like
> > > > > cpuinfo. So, instead of parsing the ACPI table every time, cache
> > > > > the RINTC structures and provide a function to get the correct
> > > > > RINTC structure for a given cpu.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
> > > > > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h | 2 ++
> > > > > arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > 2 files changed, 62 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h
> > > > > index 9be52b6ffae1..1606dce8992e 100644
> > > > > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h
> > > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/acpi.h
> > > > > @@ -59,6 +59,8 @@ static inline bool acpi_has_cpu_in_madt(void)
> > > > >
> > > > > static inline void arch_fix_phys_package_id(int num, u32 slot) { }
> > > > >
> > > > > +struct acpi_madt_rintc *acpi_cpu_get_madt_rintc(int cpu);
> > > > > +u32 get_acpi_id_for_cpu(int cpu);
> > > > > #endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */
> > > > >
> > > > > #endif /*_ASM_ACPI_H*/
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c
> > > > > index 81d448c41714..40ab55309c70 100644
> > > > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c
> > > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/acpi.c
> > > > > @@ -24,6 +24,66 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_disabled);
> > > > > int acpi_pci_disabled = 1; /* skip ACPI PCI scan and IRQ initialization */
> > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_pci_disabled);
> > > > >
> > > > > +static struct acpi_madt_rintc cpu_madt_rintc[NR_CPUS];
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static int acpi_parse_madt_rintc(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, const unsigned long end)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct acpi_madt_rintc *rintc = (struct acpi_madt_rintc *)header;
> > > > > + int cpuid;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (!(rintc->flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED))
> > > > > + return 0;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + cpuid = riscv_hartid_to_cpuid(rintc->hart_id);
> > > >
> > > > Unless I'm missing something, this races with CPUs coming online. Maybe
> > > > that's a rare enough case we don't care, but I think we'd also just have
> > > > simpler logic if we fixed it...
> > > >
> > > This depend only on cpuid_to_hartid_map filled up. I wish I could
> > > initialize this RINTC mapping in setup_smp() itself like ARM64. But in
> > > RISC-V, this file smpboot.c gets built only when CONFIG_SMP is enabled.
> > > Hence, we need to initialize this array outside of setup_smp().
> > >
> > > I can update the code to initialize this from setup_arch() immediately
> > > after setup_smp() if ACPI is enabled. That should avoid the global
> > > variable check also. Let me know if you prefer this.
> > >
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > + * When CONFIG_SMP is disabled, mapping won't be created for
> > > > > + * all cpus.
> > > > > + * CPUs more than NR_CPUS, will be ignored.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > + if (cpuid >= 0 && cpuid < NR_CPUS)
> > > > > + cpu_madt_rintc[cpuid] = *rintc;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + return 0;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static int acpi_init_rintc_array(void)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + if (acpi_table_parse_madt(ACPI_MADT_TYPE_RINTC, acpi_parse_madt_rintc, 0) > 0)
> > > > > + return 0;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + return -ENODEV;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +
> > > > > +/*
> > > > > + * Instead of parsing (and freeing) the ACPI table, cache
> > > > > + * the RINTC structures since they are frequently used
> > > > > + * like in cpuinfo.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > +struct acpi_madt_rintc *acpi_cpu_get_madt_rintc(int cpu)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + static bool rintc_init_done;
> > > >
> > > > ... basically just get rid of this global variable, and instead have a
> > > >
> > > > if (!&cpu_madt_rintc[cpu])
> > > > ... parse ...
> > > > return &cpu_madt_rintc[cpu];
> > > >
> > > > that'd probably let us get rid of a handful of these helpers too, as now
> > > > it's just a call to the parsing bits.
> > > >
> > > I am afraid this (!&cpu_madt_rintc[cpu]) check won't work since we are
> > > not caching the RINTC pointers but actual contents itself. So, the
> > > address is always valid. However, as per Drew's earlier feedback I am
> > > going to reduce one helper. I am planning to send the next version of
> > > this patch once 6.4 rc1 is available since the ACPICA patches are merged
> > > now.
> > >
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (!rintc_init_done) {
> > > > > + if (acpi_init_rintc_array()) {
> > > > > + pr_err("No valid RINTC entries exist\n");
> > > > > + return NULL;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + rintc_init_done = true;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + return &cpu_madt_rintc[cpu];
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +
> > > > > +u32 get_acpi_id_for_cpu(int cpu)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct acpi_madt_rintc *rintc = acpi_cpu_get_madt_rintc(cpu);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + BUG_ON(!rintc);
> > > >
> > > > We should have some better error reporting here. It looks like all the
> > > > callerss of get_acpi_id_for_cpu() are tolerant of a nonsense ID being
> > > > returned, so maybe we just pr_warn() something users can understand and then
> > > > return -1 or something?
> > > >
> > >
> > > RINTC is mandatory for ACPI systems. Also, all 32bit values are valid
> > > for UID. So, there is no bogus value we can return.
> > >
> > > Actually, I just realized this check is redundant. It will never be NULL
> > > since it is a static array. So, we can just get rid of the BUG.
> >
> > It can be NULL on the first call of acpi_cpu_get_madt_rintc(), which is
> > a good time to BUG if there's isn't an RINTC.
> >
> Sorry, I mean if we change the initialization to get called from
> setup_arch, then we can get rid of this check along with global variable
> check, correct?

Sounds good to me, but now I think we're pushing the question of whether
to BUG or not on a missing RINTC to that new init function, because
otherwise we'll still end up in get_acpi_id_for_cpu() eventually with
or without a valid rintc from which we get the uid (and the uid has no
specified bogus value).

Thanks,
drew