Re: [PATCH V6 0/7] ACPI: Support Generic Initiator proximity domains

From: Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org
Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
	jglisse@redhat.com, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	linuxarm@huawei.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Tao Xu <tao3.xu@intel.com>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 0/7] ACPI: Support Generic Initiator proximity domains
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 12:32:06 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <dc5f5502-09c6-d476-db0e-0af3412bb031@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191216153809.105463-1-Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>

Le 16/12/2019 à 16:38, Jonathan Cameron a écrit :
> Introduces a new type of NUMA node for cases where we want to represent
> the access characteristics of a non CPU initiator of memory requests,
> as these differ from all those for existing nodes containing CPUs and/or
> memory.
>
> These Generic Initiators are presented by the node access0 class in
> sysfs in the same way as a CPU.   It seems likely that there will be
> usecases in which the best 'CPU' is desired and Generic Initiators
> should be ignored.  The final few patches in this series introduced
> access1 which is a new performance class in the sysfs node description
> which presents only CPU to memory relationships.  Test cases for this
> are described below.

Hello Jonathan

If I want to test this with a fake GI, what are the minimal set of
changes I should put in my ACPI tables? Can I just specify a dummy GI in
SRAT? What handle should I use there?

Thanks

Brice