All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
	<linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com>,
	Robert Richter <rrichter@cavium.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 08/10] dt, numa: Add NUMA dt binding implementation.
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:26:34 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56CFA9CA.6090803@caviumnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160223193651.GA8491@rob-hp-laptop>

On 02/23/2016 11:36 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 05:13:17PM -0800, David Daney wrote:
>> From: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com>
>>
>> ADD device tree node parsing for NUMA topology using device
>> "numa-node-id" property distance-map.
>
> I still want an adequate explanation why NUMA setup cannot be done with
> an unflattened tree. PowerPC manages to do that and should have a
> similar init flow being memblock based, so I would expect arm64 can too.

Many things could be done.  Really, we want to know what *should* be done.

In the context of the current arm64 memory initialization we (more or 
less) do:

  1) early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem();
  2) memory_present()
  3) sparse_init()
  4) other things
  5) unflatten_device_tree()

We are already reading information out of the FDT at #1.

This patch set adds a step between 1 and 2 where we read NUMA 
information out of the FDT.

Hypothetically, it might be possible to rewrite the arm64 setup code so 
that the ordering was different, and the NUMA setup was done on the 
unflattened tree, but that would certainly be a much more invasive patch.

If the arm64 maintainers would like a rewrite of:

   arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
   arch/arm64/mm/init.c
   arch/arm64/mm/mm/mmu.c
   .
   .
   .

we can discuss doing NUMA setup with the unflattened tree.  With the 
current memory initialization code, I think it makes more sense to parse 
the NUMA information out of the flattened form.

David Daney

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Daney <ddaney-M3mlKVOIwJVv6pq1l3V1OdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: David Daney <ddaney.cavm-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Ian Campbell
	<ijc+devicetree-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org>,
	Kumar Gala <galak-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>,
	devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	Ard Biesheuvel
	<ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Frank Rowand
	<frowand.list-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	Grant Likely
	<grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	Matt Fleming
	<matt-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	Ganapatrao Kulkarni
	<gkulkarni-M3mlKVOIwJVv6pq1l3V1OdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>,
	Robert Richter <rrichter-YGCgFSpz5w/QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	David Daney <david.daney-YGCgFSpz5w/QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 08/10] dt, numa: Add NUMA dt binding implementation.
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:26:34 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56CFA9CA.6090803@caviumnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160223193651.GA8491@rob-hp-laptop>

On 02/23/2016 11:36 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 05:13:17PM -0800, David Daney wrote:
>> From: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni-M3mlKVOIwJVv6pq1l3V1OdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
>>
>> ADD device tree node parsing for NUMA topology using device
>> "numa-node-id" property distance-map.
>
> I still want an adequate explanation why NUMA setup cannot be done with
> an unflattened tree. PowerPC manages to do that and should have a
> similar init flow being memblock based, so I would expect arm64 can too.

Many things could be done.  Really, we want to know what *should* be done.

In the context of the current arm64 memory initialization we (more or 
less) do:

  1) early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem();
  2) memory_present()
  3) sparse_init()
  4) other things
  5) unflatten_device_tree()

We are already reading information out of the FDT at #1.

This patch set adds a step between 1 and 2 where we read NUMA 
information out of the FDT.

Hypothetically, it might be possible to rewrite the arm64 setup code so 
that the ordering was different, and the NUMA setup was done on the 
unflattened tree, but that would certainly be a much more invasive patch.

If the arm64 maintainers would like a rewrite of:

   arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
   arch/arm64/mm/init.c
   arch/arm64/mm/mm/mmu.c
   .
   .
   .

we can discuss doing NUMA setup with the unflattened tree.  With the 
current memory initialization code, I think it makes more sense to parse 
the NUMA information out of the flattened form.

David Daney


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: ddaney@caviumnetworks.com (David Daney)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v11 08/10] dt, numa: Add NUMA dt binding implementation.
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:26:34 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56CFA9CA.6090803@caviumnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160223193651.GA8491@rob-hp-laptop>

On 02/23/2016 11:36 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 05:13:17PM -0800, David Daney wrote:
>> From: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com>
>>
>> ADD device tree node parsing for NUMA topology using device
>> "numa-node-id" property distance-map.
>
> I still want an adequate explanation why NUMA setup cannot be done with
> an unflattened tree. PowerPC manages to do that and should have a
> similar init flow being memblock based, so I would expect arm64 can too.

Many things could be done.  Really, we want to know what *should* be done.

In the context of the current arm64 memory initialization we (more or 
less) do:

  1) early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem();
  2) memory_present()
  3) sparse_init()
  4) other things
  5) unflatten_device_tree()

We are already reading information out of the FDT at #1.

This patch set adds a step between 1 and 2 where we read NUMA 
information out of the FDT.

Hypothetically, it might be possible to rewrite the arm64 setup code so 
that the ordering was different, and the NUMA setup was done on the 
unflattened tree, but that would certainly be a much more invasive patch.

If the arm64 maintainers would like a rewrite of:

   arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
   arch/arm64/mm/init.c
   arch/arm64/mm/mm/mmu.c
   .
   .
   .

we can discuss doing NUMA setup with the unflattened tree.  With the 
current memory initialization code, I think it makes more sense to parse 
the NUMA information out of the flattened form.

David Daney

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-26  1:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-20  1:13 [PATCH v11 00/10] arm64, numa: Add numa support for arm64 platforms David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 01/10] of/fdt: make generic early_init_dt_add_memory_arch() a weak alias David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 02/10] arm64: override generic version of early_init_dt_add_memory_arch() David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 03/10] efi: move FDT handling to separate object file David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 04/10] arm64/efi: move EFI /chosen node parsing before early FDT processing David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 05/10] arm64/efi: ignore DT memory nodes instead of removing them David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 06/10] arm64/efi: ignore DT memreserve entries " David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 07/10] Documentation, dt, numa: dt bindings for NUMA David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 08/10] dt, numa: Add NUMA dt binding implementation David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-23 19:36   ` Rob Herring
2016-02-23 19:36     ` Rob Herring
2016-02-23 19:36     ` Rob Herring
2016-02-26  1:26     ` David Daney [this message]
2016-02-26  1:26       ` David Daney
2016-02-26  1:26       ` David Daney
2016-02-26 18:27       ` Will Deacon
2016-02-26 18:27         ` Will Deacon
2016-02-26 18:27         ` Will Deacon
2016-03-01 16:56         ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 16:56           ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 16:56           ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 16:47       ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 16:47         ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 16:47         ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 16:57         ` David Daney
2016-03-01 16:57           ` David Daney
2016-03-01 16:57           ` David Daney
2016-03-01 17:43           ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 17:43             ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 17:43             ` Rob Herring
2016-03-01 17:58             ` David Daney
2016-03-01 17:58               ` David Daney
2016-03-01 17:58               ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 09/10] arm64, numa: Add NUMA support for arm64 platforms David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13 ` [PATCH v11 10/10] arm64, mm, numa: Add NUMA balancing support for arm64 David Daney
2016-02-20  1:13   ` David Daney
2016-02-20  8:20 ` [PATCH v11 00/10] arm64, numa: Add numa support for arm64 platforms Ard Biesheuvel
2016-02-20  8:20   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-02-20  8:20   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-02-20 10:39   ` Robert Richter
2016-02-20 10:39     ` Robert Richter
2016-02-20 10:39     ` Robert Richter
2016-02-20 10:44     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-02-20 10:44       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-02-20 10:44       ` Ard Biesheuvel

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=56CFA9CA.6090803@caviumnetworks.com \
    --to=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=david.daney@cavium.com \
    --cc=ddaney.cavm@gmail.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=galak@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
    --cc=ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --cc=pawel.moll@arm.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=rrichter@cavium.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 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.