All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, palmer@rivosinc.com,
	Ionela.Voinescu@arm.com,
	Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] cacheinfo: Use RISC-V's init_cache_level() as generic OF implementation
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 10:53:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43780b8b-d358-ba8f-a4af-06165dbbf18a@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221220233912.GA1193943-robh@kernel.org>

Hello Rob,

On 12/21/22 00:39, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 11:31:23AM +0100, Pierre Gondois wrote:
>> RISC-V's implementation of init_of_cache_level() is following
>> the Devicetree Specification v0.3 regarding caches, cf.:
>> - s3.7.3 'Internal (L1) Cache Properties'
>> - s3.8 'Multi-level and Shared Cache Nodes'
>>
>> Allow reusing the implementation by moving it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
>> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 39 +------------------------------
>>   drivers/base/cacheinfo.c      | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   include/linux/cacheinfo.h     |  1 +
>>   3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> index 90deabfe63ea..440a3df5944c 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> @@ -115,44 +115,7 @@ static void fill_cacheinfo(struct cacheinfo **this_leaf,
>>   
>>   int init_cache_level(unsigned int cpu)
>>   {
>> -	struct cpu_cacheinfo *this_cpu_ci = get_cpu_cacheinfo(cpu);
>> -	struct device_node *np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
>> -	struct device_node *prev = NULL;
>> -	int levels = 0, leaves = 0, level;
>> -
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "d-cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (leaves > 0)
>> -		levels = 1;
>> -
>> -	prev = np;
>> -	while ((np = of_find_next_cache_node(np))) {
>> -		of_node_put(prev);
>> -		prev = np;
>> -		if (!of_device_is_compatible(np, "cache"))
>> -			break;
>> -		if (of_property_read_u32(np, "cache-level", &level))
>> -			break;
>> -		if (level <= levels)
>> -			break;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "d-cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		levels = level;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -	of_node_put(np);
>> -	this_cpu_ci->num_levels = levels;
>> -	this_cpu_ci->num_leaves = leaves;
>> -
>> -	return 0;
>> +	return init_of_cache_level(cpu);
> 
> Not in this patch, but in patch 5, shouldn't riscv init_cache_level() be
> removed? The topology code already called init_of_cache_level() and
> RiscV has nothing architectural to add/change. IOW, init_cache_level()
> should only do architecture defined init, and not anything DT or ACPI
> related (unless those are non-standard).
> 
> Rob

I think you are right. Just to re-phrase your point:
init_of_cache_level() is called through this path:
init_cpu_topology()
\-fetch_cache_info()
   \-init_of_cache_level()

If there is missing information in the DT and it's not possible to create the
cacheinfo, then the arch specific implementation i.e. init_cache_level() is
called through:
update_siblings_masks() | cacheinfo_cpu_online()
\-detect_cache_attributes()
   \-init_cache_level()

This is useful for arm to call init_cache_level() since it is possible
to extract some information from some registers. For RISC-V, if
init_of_cache_level() fails, then init_cache_level() will fail again.
So removing RISC-V's init_cache_level() makes sense.

Regards,
Pierre


_______________________________________________
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: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, palmer@rivosinc.com,
	Ionela.Voinescu@arm.com,
	Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] cacheinfo: Use RISC-V's init_cache_level() as generic OF implementation
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 10:53:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43780b8b-d358-ba8f-a4af-06165dbbf18a@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221220233912.GA1193943-robh@kernel.org>

Hello Rob,

On 12/21/22 00:39, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 11:31:23AM +0100, Pierre Gondois wrote:
>> RISC-V's implementation of init_of_cache_level() is following
>> the Devicetree Specification v0.3 regarding caches, cf.:
>> - s3.7.3 'Internal (L1) Cache Properties'
>> - s3.8 'Multi-level and Shared Cache Nodes'
>>
>> Allow reusing the implementation by moving it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
>> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 39 +------------------------------
>>   drivers/base/cacheinfo.c      | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   include/linux/cacheinfo.h     |  1 +
>>   3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> index 90deabfe63ea..440a3df5944c 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> @@ -115,44 +115,7 @@ static void fill_cacheinfo(struct cacheinfo **this_leaf,
>>   
>>   int init_cache_level(unsigned int cpu)
>>   {
>> -	struct cpu_cacheinfo *this_cpu_ci = get_cpu_cacheinfo(cpu);
>> -	struct device_node *np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
>> -	struct device_node *prev = NULL;
>> -	int levels = 0, leaves = 0, level;
>> -
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "d-cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (leaves > 0)
>> -		levels = 1;
>> -
>> -	prev = np;
>> -	while ((np = of_find_next_cache_node(np))) {
>> -		of_node_put(prev);
>> -		prev = np;
>> -		if (!of_device_is_compatible(np, "cache"))
>> -			break;
>> -		if (of_property_read_u32(np, "cache-level", &level))
>> -			break;
>> -		if (level <= levels)
>> -			break;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "d-cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		levels = level;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -	of_node_put(np);
>> -	this_cpu_ci->num_levels = levels;
>> -	this_cpu_ci->num_leaves = leaves;
>> -
>> -	return 0;
>> +	return init_of_cache_level(cpu);
> 
> Not in this patch, but in patch 5, shouldn't riscv init_cache_level() be
> removed? The topology code already called init_of_cache_level() and
> RiscV has nothing architectural to add/change. IOW, init_cache_level()
> should only do architecture defined init, and not anything DT or ACPI
> related (unless those are non-standard).
> 
> Rob

I think you are right. Just to re-phrase your point:
init_of_cache_level() is called through this path:
init_cpu_topology()
\-fetch_cache_info()
   \-init_of_cache_level()

If there is missing information in the DT and it's not possible to create the
cacheinfo, then the arch specific implementation i.e. init_cache_level() is
called through:
update_siblings_masks() | cacheinfo_cpu_online()
\-detect_cache_attributes()
   \-init_cache_level()

This is useful for arm to call init_cache_level() since it is possible
to extract some information from some registers. For RISC-V, if
init_of_cache_level() fails, then init_cache_level() will fail again.
So removing RISC-V's init_cache_level() makes sense.

Regards,
Pierre


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

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, palmer@rivosinc.com,
	Ionela.Voinescu@arm.com,
	Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] cacheinfo: Use RISC-V's init_cache_level() as generic OF implementation
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 10:53:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43780b8b-d358-ba8f-a4af-06165dbbf18a@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221220233912.GA1193943-robh@kernel.org>

Hello Rob,

On 12/21/22 00:39, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 11:31:23AM +0100, Pierre Gondois wrote:
>> RISC-V's implementation of init_of_cache_level() is following
>> the Devicetree Specification v0.3 regarding caches, cf.:
>> - s3.7.3 'Internal (L1) Cache Properties'
>> - s3.8 'Multi-level and Shared Cache Nodes'
>>
>> Allow reusing the implementation by moving it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
>> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 39 +------------------------------
>>   drivers/base/cacheinfo.c      | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   include/linux/cacheinfo.h     |  1 +
>>   3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> index 90deabfe63ea..440a3df5944c 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
>> @@ -115,44 +115,7 @@ static void fill_cacheinfo(struct cacheinfo **this_leaf,
>>   
>>   int init_cache_level(unsigned int cpu)
>>   {
>> -	struct cpu_cacheinfo *this_cpu_ci = get_cpu_cacheinfo(cpu);
>> -	struct device_node *np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
>> -	struct device_node *prev = NULL;
>> -	int levels = 0, leaves = 0, level;
>> -
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "d-cache-size"))
>> -		++leaves;
>> -	if (leaves > 0)
>> -		levels = 1;
>> -
>> -	prev = np;
>> -	while ((np = of_find_next_cache_node(np))) {
>> -		of_node_put(prev);
>> -		prev = np;
>> -		if (!of_device_is_compatible(np, "cache"))
>> -			break;
>> -		if (of_property_read_u32(np, "cache-level", &level))
>> -			break;
>> -		if (level <= levels)
>> -			break;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "d-cache-size"))
>> -			++leaves;
>> -		levels = level;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -	of_node_put(np);
>> -	this_cpu_ci->num_levels = levels;
>> -	this_cpu_ci->num_leaves = leaves;
>> -
>> -	return 0;
>> +	return init_of_cache_level(cpu);
> 
> Not in this patch, but in patch 5, shouldn't riscv init_cache_level() be
> removed? The topology code already called init_of_cache_level() and
> RiscV has nothing architectural to add/change. IOW, init_cache_level()
> should only do architecture defined init, and not anything DT or ACPI
> related (unless those are non-standard).
> 
> Rob

I think you are right. Just to re-phrase your point:
init_of_cache_level() is called through this path:
init_cpu_topology()
\-fetch_cache_info()
   \-init_of_cache_level()

If there is missing information in the DT and it's not possible to create the
cacheinfo, then the arch specific implementation i.e. init_cache_level() is
called through:
update_siblings_masks() | cacheinfo_cpu_online()
\-detect_cache_attributes()
   \-init_cache_level()

This is useful for arm to call init_cache_level() since it is possible
to extract some information from some registers. For RISC-V, if
init_of_cache_level() fails, then init_cache_level() will fail again.
So removing RISC-V's init_cache_level() makes sense.

Regards,
Pierre


  reply	other threads:[~2022-12-21  9:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-09 10:31 [PATCH v3 0/5] arch_topology: Build cacheinfo from primary CPU Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31 ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31 ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] cacheinfo: Use RISC-V's init_cache_level() as generic OF implementation Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-20 23:39   ` Rob Herring
2022-12-20 23:39     ` Rob Herring
2022-12-20 23:39     ` Rob Herring
2022-12-21  9:53     ` Pierre Gondois [this message]
2022-12-21  9:53       ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-21  9:53       ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] cacheinfo: Return error code in init_of_cache_level() Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] ACPI: PPTT: Remove acpi_find_cache_levels() Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] ACPI: PPTT: Update acpi_find_last_cache_level() to acpi_get_cache_info() Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] arch_topology: Build cacheinfo from primary CPU Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-09 10:31   ` Pierre Gondois
2022-12-29 16:47 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] " Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-12-29 16:47   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-12-29 16:47   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-01-04 18:35   ` Pierre Gondois
2023-01-04 18:35     ` Pierre Gondois
2023-01-04 18:35     ` Pierre Gondois

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=43780b8b-d358-ba8f-a4af-06165dbbf18a@arm.com \
    --to=pierre.gondois@arm.com \
    --cc=Ionela.Voinescu@arm.com \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=gshan@redhat.com \
    --cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
    --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-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=palmer@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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.