From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Qing Wang <wangqing@vivo.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] arch_topology: Don't set cluster identifier as physical package identifier
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 14:13:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220520131347.cgaevw77yjk523mw@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d4c7fd09-814a-e57a-fe8f-a3959472991b@arm.com>
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 02:31:24PM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 18/05/2022 11:33, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
> You say `cluster identifier` which to me refers to
> `cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id`. But I guess you meant `cluster node`
> from cpu-map DT node?
>
Correct, I am referring to the leaf cluster node identifier in terms
of cpu-map DT node which we now store in cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id as
part of this series instead of previous cpu_topology[cpu].package_id.
> Otherwise you say we link (1.level) cpu-map cluster nodes to
> `cluster_id\_sibling`? But then (1) we will never support nested
> clusters and (2) why would we need llc support then?
>
(1) Do we have any platforms with nested clusters today ? No phantom
clusters please as this is info that gets to the userspace and must
reflect the real hardware. If one exist, then we need to add nested
cluster if we need to support that hardware. I am not aware of any
platform in particular DT based one.
(2) LLC was added to support chiplets. IIRC, cpu_coregroup_mask was changed
to select the smallest of LLC, socket siblings, and NUMA node siblings
to ensure that the sched domain we build for the MC layer isn't larger
than the DIE above it or it's shrunk to the socket or NUMA node if LLC
exist across NUMA node/chiplets.
But overtime, we have patched cpu_coregroup_mask to workaround things
which I think is now about to break 🙁.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Qing Wang <wangqing@vivo.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] arch_topology: Don't set cluster identifier as physical package identifier
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 14:13:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220520131347.cgaevw77yjk523mw@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d4c7fd09-814a-e57a-fe8f-a3959472991b@arm.com>
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 02:31:24PM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 18/05/2022 11:33, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
> You say `cluster identifier` which to me refers to
> `cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id`. But I guess you meant `cluster node`
> from cpu-map DT node?
>
Correct, I am referring to the leaf cluster node identifier in terms
of cpu-map DT node which we now store in cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id as
part of this series instead of previous cpu_topology[cpu].package_id.
> Otherwise you say we link (1.level) cpu-map cluster nodes to
> `cluster_id\_sibling`? But then (1) we will never support nested
> clusters and (2) why would we need llc support then?
>
(1) Do we have any platforms with nested clusters today ? No phantom
clusters please as this is info that gets to the userspace and must
reflect the real hardware. If one exist, then we need to add nested
cluster if we need to support that hardware. I am not aware of any
platform in particular DT based one.
(2) LLC was added to support chiplets. IIRC, cpu_coregroup_mask was changed
to select the smallest of LLC, socket siblings, and NUMA node siblings
to ensure that the sched domain we build for the MC layer isn't larger
than the DIE above it or it's shrunk to the socket or NUMA node if LLC
exist across NUMA node/chiplets.
But overtime, we have patched cpu_coregroup_mask to workaround things
which I think is now about to break 🙁.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
Qing Wang <wangqing@vivo.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] arch_topology: Don't set cluster identifier as physical package identifier
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 14:13:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220520131347.cgaevw77yjk523mw@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d4c7fd09-814a-e57a-fe8f-a3959472991b@arm.com>
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 02:31:24PM +0200, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 18/05/2022 11:33, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
> You say `cluster identifier` which to me refers to
> `cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id`. But I guess you meant `cluster node`
> from cpu-map DT node?
>
Correct, I am referring to the leaf cluster node identifier in terms
of cpu-map DT node which we now store in cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_id as
part of this series instead of previous cpu_topology[cpu].package_id.
> Otherwise you say we link (1.level) cpu-map cluster nodes to
> `cluster_id\_sibling`? But then (1) we will never support nested
> clusters and (2) why would we need llc support then?
>
(1) Do we have any platforms with nested clusters today ? No phantom
clusters please as this is info that gets to the userspace and must
reflect the real hardware. If one exist, then we need to add nested
cluster if we need to support that hardware. I am not aware of any
platform in particular DT based one.
(2) LLC was added to support chiplets. IIRC, cpu_coregroup_mask was changed
to select the smallest of LLC, socket siblings, and NUMA node siblings
to ensure that the sched domain we build for the MC layer isn't larger
than the DIE above it or it's shrunk to the socket or NUMA node if LLC
exist across NUMA node/chiplets.
But overtime, we have patched cpu_coregroup_mask to workaround things
which I think is now about to break 🙁.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-20 13:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-18 9:33 [PATCH v2 0/8] arch_topology: Updates to add socket support and fix cluster ids Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] arch_topology: Don't set cluster identifier as physical package identifier Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 12:31 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 12:31 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 12:31 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 13:13 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2022-05-20 13:13 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 13:13 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] arch_topology: Set thread sibling cpumask only within the cluster Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 12:32 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 12:32 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 12:32 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 13:20 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 13:20 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 13:20 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] arch_topology: Set cluster identifier in each core/thread from /cpu-map Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-19 16:55 ` Ionela Voinescu
2022-05-19 16:55 ` Ionela Voinescu
2022-05-19 16:55 ` Ionela Voinescu
2022-05-20 12:33 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 12:33 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 12:33 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 13:54 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 13:54 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 13:54 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 15:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 15:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 15:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] arch_topology: Add support for parsing sockets in /cpu-map Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] arch_topology: Check for non-negative value rather than -1 for IDs validity Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] arch_topology: Avoid parsing through all the CPUs once a outlier CPU is found Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] of: base: add support to get the device node for the CPU's last level cache Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] arch_topology: Add support to build llc_sibling on DT platforms Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-18 9:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-19 18:10 ` Rob Herring
2022-05-19 18:10 ` Rob Herring
2022-05-19 18:10 ` Rob Herring
2022-05-20 12:59 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 12:59 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 12:59 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 14:36 ` Rob Herring
2022-05-20 14:36 ` Rob Herring
2022-05-20 14:36 ` Rob Herring
2022-05-20 15:06 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 15:06 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 15:06 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 12:33 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 12:33 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 12:33 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2022-05-20 14:56 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 14:56 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 14:56 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-19 16:32 ` [PATCH v2 0/8] arch_topology: Updates to add socket support and fix cluster ids Ionela Voinescu
2022-05-19 16:32 ` Ionela Voinescu
2022-05-19 16:32 ` Ionela Voinescu
2022-05-20 15:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 15:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-05-20 15:33 ` Sudeep Holla
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=20220520131347.cgaevw77yjk523mw@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=atishp@atishpatra.org \
--cc=atishp@rivosinc.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=wangqing@vivo.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.