All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	Dmitriy Cherkasov <dmitriy@oss-tech.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
	"moderated list:ARM64 PORT (AARCH64 ARCHITECTURE)" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v1 2/4] dt-binding: cpu-topology: Move cpu-map to a common binding.
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 20:31:22 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181212023122.GB14213@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1543534100-3654-3-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 03:28:18PM -0800, Atish Patra wrote:
> cpu-map binding can be used to described cpu topology for both
> RISC-V & ARM. It makes more sense to move the binding to document
> to a common place.
> 
> The relevant discussion can be found here.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/6/19
> 
> Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
> ---
>  .../{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt}     | 81 ++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>  rename Documentation/devicetree/bindings/{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt} (86%)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> similarity index 86%
> rename from Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> rename to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> index 66848355..1de6fbce 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> @@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
>  ===========================================
> -ARM topology binding description
> +CPU topology binding description
>  ===========================================
>  
>  ===========================================
>  1 - Introduction
>  ===========================================
>  
> -In an ARM system, the hierarchy of CPUs is defined through three entities that
> +In a SMP system, the hierarchy of CPUs is defined through three entities that
>  are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
>  
>  - socket
> @@ -14,9 +14,6 @@ are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
>  - core
>  - thread
>  
> -The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1]) represent the devices that
> -correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.
> -
>  The bottom hierarchy level sits at core or thread level depending on whether
>  symmetric multi-threading (SMT) is supported or not.
>  
> @@ -25,33 +22,37 @@ threads existing in the system and map to the hierarchy level "thread" above.
>  In systems where SMT is not supported "cpu" nodes represent all cores present
>  in the system and map to the hierarchy level "core" above.
>  
> -ARM topology bindings allow one to associate cpu nodes with hierarchical groups
> +CPU topology bindings allow one to associate cpu nodes with hierarchical groups
>  corresponding to the system hierarchy; syntactically they are defined as device
>  tree nodes.
>  
> -The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM, based
> -on the Devicetree Specification, available from:
> +Currently, only ARM/RISC-V intend to use this cpu topology binding but it may be
> +used for any other architecture as well.
>  
> -https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> +The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM/RISC-V, based

You already said who are current users, why restrict it to ARM and 
RISC-V here?

> +on the Devicetree Specification, available at [4].
> +
> +The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1] for ARM or [2] for RISC-V) represent the devices that
> +correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.

The cpu topology isn't dependent on anything beyond what the DT spec 
says for cpu nodes so I think this can be simplified to just refer to 
the spec.

Plus, shouldn't [2] (numa) be [3] here.

>  If not stated otherwise, whenever a reference to a cpu node phandle is made its
>  value must point to a cpu node compliant with the cpu node bindings as
> -documented in [1].
> +documented in [1] or [3] for respective ISA.
>  A topology description containing phandles to cpu nodes that are not compliant
> -with bindings standardized in [1] is therefore considered invalid.
> +with bindings standardized in [1] or [3] is therefore considered invalid.
>  
>  ===========================================
>  2 - cpu-map node
>  ===========================================
>  
> -The ARM CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
> +The ARM/RISC-V CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
>  child of the cpus node and provides a container where the actual topology
>  nodes are listed.
>  
>  - cpu-map node
>  
> -	Usage: Optional - On ARM SMP systems provide CPUs topology to the OS.
> -			  ARM uniprocessor systems do not require a topology
> +	Usage: Optional - On SMP systems provide CPUs topology to the OS.
> +			  Uniprocessor systems do not require a topology
>  			  description and therefore should not define a
>  			  cpu-map node.
>  
> @@ -494,8 +495,60 @@ cpus {
>  	};
>  };
>  
> +Example 3: HiFive Unleashed (RISC-V 64 bit, 4 core system)
> +
> +cpus {
> +	#address-cells = <2>;
> +	#size-cells = <2>;
> +	compatible = "sifive,fu540g", "sifive,fu500";
> +	model = "sifive,hifive-unleashed-a00";

This is wrong. Looks like the root node, but called 'cpus'.

> +
> +	...
> +
> +	cpu-map {
> +		cluster0 {
> +			core0 {
> +				cpu = <&L12>;
> +		 	};

Mixed space and tabs.

> +			core1 {
> +				cpu = <&L15>;
> +			};
> +			core2 {
> +				cpu0 = <&L18>;
> +			};
> +			core3 {
> +				cpu0 = <&L21>;
> +			};
> +		};
> + 	};

Mixed space and tab.

> +
> +	L12: cpu@1 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x1>;
> +	}
> +
> +	L15: cpu@2 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x2>;
> +	}
> +	L18: cpu@3 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x3>;
> +	}
> +	L21: cpu@4 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x4>;
> +	}
> +};
>  ===============================================================================
>  [1] ARM Linux kernel documentation
>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
>  [2] Devicetree NUMA binding description
>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt
> +[3] RISC-V Linux kernel documentation
> +    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.txt
> +[4] https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	Dmitriy Cherkasov <dmitriy@oss-tech.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
	"moderated list:ARM64 PORT (AARCH64 ARCHITECTURE)"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Sudeep
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v1 2/4] dt-binding: cpu-topology: Move cpu-map to a common binding.
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 20:31:22 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181212023122.GB14213@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1543534100-3654-3-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 03:28:18PM -0800, Atish Patra wrote:
> cpu-map binding can be used to described cpu topology for both
> RISC-V & ARM. It makes more sense to move the binding to document
> to a common place.
> 
> The relevant discussion can be found here.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/6/19
> 
> Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
> ---
>  .../{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt}     | 81 ++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>  rename Documentation/devicetree/bindings/{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt} (86%)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> similarity index 86%
> rename from Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> rename to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> index 66848355..1de6fbce 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> @@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
>  ===========================================
> -ARM topology binding description
> +CPU topology binding description
>  ===========================================
>  
>  ===========================================
>  1 - Introduction
>  ===========================================
>  
> -In an ARM system, the hierarchy of CPUs is defined through three entities that
> +In a SMP system, the hierarchy of CPUs is defined through three entities that
>  are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
>  
>  - socket
> @@ -14,9 +14,6 @@ are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
>  - core
>  - thread
>  
> -The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1]) represent the devices that
> -correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.
> -
>  The bottom hierarchy level sits at core or thread level depending on whether
>  symmetric multi-threading (SMT) is supported or not.
>  
> @@ -25,33 +22,37 @@ threads existing in the system and map to the hierarchy level "thread" above.
>  In systems where SMT is not supported "cpu" nodes represent all cores present
>  in the system and map to the hierarchy level "core" above.
>  
> -ARM topology bindings allow one to associate cpu nodes with hierarchical groups
> +CPU topology bindings allow one to associate cpu nodes with hierarchical groups
>  corresponding to the system hierarchy; syntactically they are defined as device
>  tree nodes.
>  
> -The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM, based
> -on the Devicetree Specification, available from:
> +Currently, only ARM/RISC-V intend to use this cpu topology binding but it may be
> +used for any other architecture as well.
>  
> -https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> +The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM/RISC-V, based

You already said who are current users, why restrict it to ARM and 
RISC-V here?

> +on the Devicetree Specification, available at [4].
> +
> +The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1] for ARM or [2] for RISC-V) represent the devices that
> +correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.

The cpu topology isn't dependent on anything beyond what the DT spec 
says for cpu nodes so I think this can be simplified to just refer to 
the spec.

Plus, shouldn't [2] (numa) be [3] here.

>  If not stated otherwise, whenever a reference to a cpu node phandle is made its
>  value must point to a cpu node compliant with the cpu node bindings as
> -documented in [1].
> +documented in [1] or [3] for respective ISA.
>  A topology description containing phandles to cpu nodes that are not compliant
> -with bindings standardized in [1] is therefore considered invalid.
> +with bindings standardized in [1] or [3] is therefore considered invalid.
>  
>  ===========================================
>  2 - cpu-map node
>  ===========================================
>  
> -The ARM CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
> +The ARM/RISC-V CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
>  child of the cpus node and provides a container where the actual topology
>  nodes are listed.
>  
>  - cpu-map node
>  
> -	Usage: Optional - On ARM SMP systems provide CPUs topology to the OS.
> -			  ARM uniprocessor systems do not require a topology
> +	Usage: Optional - On SMP systems provide CPUs topology to the OS.
> +			  Uniprocessor systems do not require a topology
>  			  description and therefore should not define a
>  			  cpu-map node.
>  
> @@ -494,8 +495,60 @@ cpus {
>  	};
>  };
>  
> +Example 3: HiFive Unleashed (RISC-V 64 bit, 4 core system)
> +
> +cpus {
> +	#address-cells = <2>;
> +	#size-cells = <2>;
> +	compatible = "sifive,fu540g", "sifive,fu500";
> +	model = "sifive,hifive-unleashed-a00";

This is wrong. Looks like the root node, but called 'cpus'.

> +
> +	...
> +
> +	cpu-map {
> +		cluster0 {
> +			core0 {
> +				cpu = <&L12>;
> +		 	};

Mixed space and tabs.

> +			core1 {
> +				cpu = <&L15>;
> +			};
> +			core2 {
> +				cpu0 = <&L18>;
> +			};
> +			core3 {
> +				cpu0 = <&L21>;
> +			};
> +		};
> + 	};

Mixed space and tab.

> +
> +	L12: cpu@1 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x1>;
> +	}
> +
> +	L15: cpu@2 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x2>;
> +	}
> +	L18: cpu@3 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x3>;
> +	}
> +	L21: cpu@4 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x4>;
> +	}
> +};
>  ===============================================================================
>  [1] ARM Linux kernel documentation
>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
>  [2] Devicetree NUMA binding description
>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt
> +[3] RISC-V Linux kernel documentation
> +    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.txt
> +[4] https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	Dmitriy Cherkasov <dmitriy@oss-tech.org>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra \(Intel\)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"moderated list:ARM64 PORT \(AARCH64 ARCHITECTURE\)"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v1 2/4] dt-binding: cpu-topology: Move cpu-map to a common binding.
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 20:31:22 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181212023122.GB14213@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1543534100-3654-3-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 03:28:18PM -0800, Atish Patra wrote:
> cpu-map binding can be used to described cpu topology for both
> RISC-V & ARM. It makes more sense to move the binding to document
> to a common place.
> 
> The relevant discussion can be found here.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/6/19
> 
> Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
> ---
>  .../{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt}     | 81 ++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>  rename Documentation/devicetree/bindings/{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt} (86%)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> similarity index 86%
> rename from Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> rename to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> index 66848355..1de6fbce 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> @@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
>  ===========================================
> -ARM topology binding description
> +CPU topology binding description
>  ===========================================
>  
>  ===========================================
>  1 - Introduction
>  ===========================================
>  
> -In an ARM system, the hierarchy of CPUs is defined through three entities that
> +In a SMP system, the hierarchy of CPUs is defined through three entities that
>  are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
>  
>  - socket
> @@ -14,9 +14,6 @@ are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
>  - core
>  - thread
>  
> -The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1]) represent the devices that
> -correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.
> -
>  The bottom hierarchy level sits at core or thread level depending on whether
>  symmetric multi-threading (SMT) is supported or not.
>  
> @@ -25,33 +22,37 @@ threads existing in the system and map to the hierarchy level "thread" above.
>  In systems where SMT is not supported "cpu" nodes represent all cores present
>  in the system and map to the hierarchy level "core" above.
>  
> -ARM topology bindings allow one to associate cpu nodes with hierarchical groups
> +CPU topology bindings allow one to associate cpu nodes with hierarchical groups
>  corresponding to the system hierarchy; syntactically they are defined as device
>  tree nodes.
>  
> -The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM, based
> -on the Devicetree Specification, available from:
> +Currently, only ARM/RISC-V intend to use this cpu topology binding but it may be
> +used for any other architecture as well.
>  
> -https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> +The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM/RISC-V, based

You already said who are current users, why restrict it to ARM and 
RISC-V here?

> +on the Devicetree Specification, available at [4].
> +
> +The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1] for ARM or [2] for RISC-V) represent the devices that
> +correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.

The cpu topology isn't dependent on anything beyond what the DT spec 
says for cpu nodes so I think this can be simplified to just refer to 
the spec.

Plus, shouldn't [2] (numa) be [3] here.

>  If not stated otherwise, whenever a reference to a cpu node phandle is made its
>  value must point to a cpu node compliant with the cpu node bindings as
> -documented in [1].
> +documented in [1] or [3] for respective ISA.
>  A topology description containing phandles to cpu nodes that are not compliant
> -with bindings standardized in [1] is therefore considered invalid.
> +with bindings standardized in [1] or [3] is therefore considered invalid.
>  
>  ===========================================
>  2 - cpu-map node
>  ===========================================
>  
> -The ARM CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
> +The ARM/RISC-V CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
>  child of the cpus node and provides a container where the actual topology
>  nodes are listed.
>  
>  - cpu-map node
>  
> -	Usage: Optional - On ARM SMP systems provide CPUs topology to the OS.
> -			  ARM uniprocessor systems do not require a topology
> +	Usage: Optional - On SMP systems provide CPUs topology to the OS.
> +			  Uniprocessor systems do not require a topology
>  			  description and therefore should not define a
>  			  cpu-map node.
>  
> @@ -494,8 +495,60 @@ cpus {
>  	};
>  };
>  
> +Example 3: HiFive Unleashed (RISC-V 64 bit, 4 core system)
> +
> +cpus {
> +	#address-cells = <2>;
> +	#size-cells = <2>;
> +	compatible = "sifive,fu540g", "sifive,fu500";
> +	model = "sifive,hifive-unleashed-a00";

This is wrong. Looks like the root node, but called 'cpus'.

> +
> +	...
> +
> +	cpu-map {
> +		cluster0 {
> +			core0 {
> +				cpu = <&L12>;
> +		 	};

Mixed space and tabs.

> +			core1 {
> +				cpu = <&L15>;
> +			};
> +			core2 {
> +				cpu0 = <&L18>;
> +			};
> +			core3 {
> +				cpu0 = <&L21>;
> +			};
> +		};
> + 	};

Mixed space and tab.

> +
> +	L12: cpu@1 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x1>;
> +	}
> +
> +	L15: cpu@2 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x2>;
> +	}
> +	L18: cpu@3 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x3>;
> +	}
> +	L21: cpu@4 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x4>;
> +	}
> +};
>  ===============================================================================
>  [1] ARM Linux kernel documentation
>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
>  [2] Devicetree NUMA binding description
>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt
> +[3] RISC-V Linux kernel documentation
> +    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.txt
> +[4] https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

_______________________________________________
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: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	Dmitriy Cherkasov <dmitriy@oss-tech.org>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra \(Intel\)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"moderated list:ARM64 PORT \(AARCH64 ARCHITECTURE\)"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v1 2/4] dt-binding: cpu-topology: Move cpu-map to a common binding.
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 20:31:22 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181212023122.GB14213@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1543534100-3654-3-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 03:28:18PM -0800, Atish Patra wrote:
> cpu-map binding can be used to described cpu topology for both
> RISC-V & ARM. It makes more sense to move the binding to document
> to a common place.
> 
> The relevant discussion can be found here.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/6/19
> 
> Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
> ---
>  .../{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt}     | 81 ++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>  rename Documentation/devicetree/bindings/{arm/topology.txt => cpu/cpu-topology.txt} (86%)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> similarity index 86%
> rename from Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> rename to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> index 66848355..1de6fbce 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt
> @@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
>  ===========================================
> -ARM topology binding description
> +CPU topology binding description
>  ===========================================
>  
>  ===========================================
>  1 - Introduction
>  ===========================================
>  
> -In an ARM system, the hierarchy of CPUs is defined through three entities that
> +In a SMP system, the hierarchy of CPUs is defined through three entities that
>  are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
>  
>  - socket
> @@ -14,9 +14,6 @@ are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
>  - core
>  - thread
>  
> -The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1]) represent the devices that
> -correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.
> -
>  The bottom hierarchy level sits at core or thread level depending on whether
>  symmetric multi-threading (SMT) is supported or not.
>  
> @@ -25,33 +22,37 @@ threads existing in the system and map to the hierarchy level "thread" above.
>  In systems where SMT is not supported "cpu" nodes represent all cores present
>  in the system and map to the hierarchy level "core" above.
>  
> -ARM topology bindings allow one to associate cpu nodes with hierarchical groups
> +CPU topology bindings allow one to associate cpu nodes with hierarchical groups
>  corresponding to the system hierarchy; syntactically they are defined as device
>  tree nodes.
>  
> -The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM, based
> -on the Devicetree Specification, available from:
> +Currently, only ARM/RISC-V intend to use this cpu topology binding but it may be
> +used for any other architecture as well.
>  
> -https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> +The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM/RISC-V, based

You already said who are current users, why restrict it to ARM and 
RISC-V here?

> +on the Devicetree Specification, available at [4].
> +
> +The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1] for ARM or [2] for RISC-V) represent the devices that
> +correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.

The cpu topology isn't dependent on anything beyond what the DT spec 
says for cpu nodes so I think this can be simplified to just refer to 
the spec.

Plus, shouldn't [2] (numa) be [3] here.

>  If not stated otherwise, whenever a reference to a cpu node phandle is made its
>  value must point to a cpu node compliant with the cpu node bindings as
> -documented in [1].
> +documented in [1] or [3] for respective ISA.
>  A topology description containing phandles to cpu nodes that are not compliant
> -with bindings standardized in [1] is therefore considered invalid.
> +with bindings standardized in [1] or [3] is therefore considered invalid.
>  
>  ===========================================
>  2 - cpu-map node
>  ===========================================
>  
> -The ARM CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
> +The ARM/RISC-V CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
>  child of the cpus node and provides a container where the actual topology
>  nodes are listed.
>  
>  - cpu-map node
>  
> -	Usage: Optional - On ARM SMP systems provide CPUs topology to the OS.
> -			  ARM uniprocessor systems do not require a topology
> +	Usage: Optional - On SMP systems provide CPUs topology to the OS.
> +			  Uniprocessor systems do not require a topology
>  			  description and therefore should not define a
>  			  cpu-map node.
>  
> @@ -494,8 +495,60 @@ cpus {
>  	};
>  };
>  
> +Example 3: HiFive Unleashed (RISC-V 64 bit, 4 core system)
> +
> +cpus {
> +	#address-cells = <2>;
> +	#size-cells = <2>;
> +	compatible = "sifive,fu540g", "sifive,fu500";
> +	model = "sifive,hifive-unleashed-a00";

This is wrong. Looks like the root node, but called 'cpus'.

> +
> +	...
> +
> +	cpu-map {
> +		cluster0 {
> +			core0 {
> +				cpu = <&L12>;
> +		 	};

Mixed space and tabs.

> +			core1 {
> +				cpu = <&L15>;
> +			};
> +			core2 {
> +				cpu0 = <&L18>;
> +			};
> +			core3 {
> +				cpu0 = <&L21>;
> +			};
> +		};
> + 	};

Mixed space and tab.

> +
> +	L12: cpu@1 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x1>;
> +	}
> +
> +	L15: cpu@2 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x2>;
> +	}
> +	L18: cpu@3 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x3>;
> +	}
> +	L21: cpu@4 {
> +		device_type = "cpu";
> +		compatible = "sifive,rocket0", "riscv";
> +		reg = <0x4>;
> +	}
> +};
>  ===============================================================================
>  [1] ARM Linux kernel documentation
>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
>  [2] Devicetree NUMA binding description
>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/numa.txt
> +[3] RISC-V Linux kernel documentation
> +    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.txt
> +[4] https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-12-12  2:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 100+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-29 23:28 [RFT PATCH v1 0/4] Unify CPU topology across ARM64 & RISC-V Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28 ` [RFT PATCH v1 1/4] Documentation: DT: arm: add support for sockets defining package boundaries Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 16:46   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:46     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:46     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:46     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-12  2:18   ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:18     ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:18     ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:18     ` Rob Herring
2018-11-29 23:28 ` [RFT PATCH v1 2/4] dt-binding: cpu-topology: Move cpu-map to a common binding Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 16:55   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:55     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:55     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:55     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:23     ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:23       ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:23       ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:23       ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:33       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:33         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:33         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:33         ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:40         ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:40           ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:40           ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:40           ` Atish Patra
2018-12-12  2:21       ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:21         ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:21         ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:21         ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:31   ` Rob Herring [this message]
2018-12-12  2:31     ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:31     ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12  2:31     ` Rob Herring
2018-12-12 18:23     ` Atish Patra
2018-12-12 18:23       ` Atish Patra
2018-12-12 18:23       ` Atish Patra
2018-12-12 18:23       ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28 ` [RFT PATCH v1 3/4] cpu-topology: Move cpu topology code to common code Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 16:58   ` Will Deacon
2018-12-03 16:58     ` Will Deacon
2018-12-03 16:58     ` Will Deacon
2018-12-03 16:58     ` Will Deacon
2018-12-03 17:12     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:12       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:12       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:12       ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-04  9:50       ` Juri Lelli
2018-12-04  9:50         ` Juri Lelli
2018-12-04  9:50         ` Juri Lelli
2018-12-04  9:50         ` Juri Lelli
2018-12-03 17:16   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:16     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:16     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:16     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 17:31     ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:31       ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:31       ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 17:31       ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28 ` [RFT PATCH v1 4/4] RISC-V: Parse cpu topology during boot Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-11-29 23:28   ` Atish Patra
2018-12-03 16:59   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:59     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:59     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-03 16:59     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-05 17:53 ` [RFT PATCH v1 0/4] Unify CPU topology across ARM64 & RISC-V Jeffrey Hugo
2018-12-05 17:53   ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-12-05 17:53   ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-12-05 17:53   ` Jeffrey Hugo
2018-12-11  0:26   ` Atish Patra
2018-12-11  0:26     ` Atish Patra
2018-12-11  0:26     ` Atish Patra
2018-12-11  0:26     ` Atish Patra
2018-12-07 13:45 ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-12-07 13:45   ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-12-07 13:45   ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-12-07 13:45   ` Morten Rasmussen
2018-12-07 15:04   ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-07 15:04     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-07 15:04     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-07 15:04     ` Sudeep Holla
2018-12-11  0:11   ` Atish Patra
2018-12-11  0:11     ` Atish Patra
2018-12-11  0:11     ` Atish Patra
2018-12-11  0:11     ` Atish Patra

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=20181212023122.GB14213@bogus \
    --to=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=anup@brainfault.org \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=atish.patra@wdc.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dmitriy@oss-tech.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=palmer@sifive.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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 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.