linux-acpi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tao Xu <tao3.xu@intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI/HMAT: Fix the parsing of Cache Associativity and Write Policy
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 16:19:55 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0e4219c3-943a-e416-e5eb-723bed8c9383@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0jYb7XQC7u0rmxF-XVMAsEoOfmD11-FYDvMrZuOuzgyiA@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/10/2019 4:06 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 2:04 AM Tao Xu <tao3.xu@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/9/2019 6:01 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 8:03 AM Tao Xu <tao3.xu@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In chapter 5.2.27.5, Table 5-147: Field "Cache Attributes" of
>>>> ACPI 6.3 spec: 0 is "None", 1 is "Direct Mapped", 2 is "Complex Cache
>>>> Indexing" for Cache Associativity; 0 is "None", 1 is "Write Back",
>>>> 2 is "Write Through" for Write Policy.
>>>
>>> Well, I'm not sure what the connection between the above statement,
>>> which is correct AFAICS, and the changes made by the patch is.
>>>
>>> Is that the *_OTHER symbol names are confusing or something deeper?
>>>
>>
>> Because in include/acpi/actbl1.h:
>>
>> #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_NONE                     (0)
>>
>> ACPI_HMAT_CA_NONE is 0, but in include/linux/node.h:
>>
>>      enum cache_indexing {
>>             NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP,
>>             NODE_CACHE_INDEXED,
>>             NODE_CACHE_OTHER,
>>      };
>> NODE_CACHE_OTHER is 2, and for otner enum:
>>
>>            case ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED:
>>                    tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP;
>>                    break;
>>            case ACPI_HMAT_CA_COMPLEX_CACHE_INDEXING:
>>                    tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_INDEXED;
>>                    break;
>> in include/acpi/actbl1.h:
>>
>>    #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED            (1)
>>    #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_COMPLEX_CACHE_INDEXING   (2)
>>
>> but in include/linux/node.h:
>>
>> NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP is 0, NODE_CACHE_INDEXED is 1. This is incorrect.
> 
> Why is it incorrect?

Sorry I paste the wrong pre-define.

This is the incorrect line:

case ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED:
tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP;

ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED is 1, NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP is 0. That means 
if HMAT table input 1 for cache_attrs.indexing, kernel store 0 in 
cache_attrs.indexing. But in ACPI 6.3, 0 means "None". So for the whole 
switch codes:

         switch ((attrs & ACPI_HMAT_CACHE_ASSOCIATIVITY) >> 8) {
         case ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED(1):
                 tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP(0);
                 break;
         case ACPI_HMAT_CA_COMPLEX_CACHE_INDEXING(2):
                 tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_INDEXED(1);
                 break;
         case ACPI_HMAT_CA_NONE(0):
         default:
                 tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_OTHER(2);
                 break;
         }

  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-10  8:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-02  7:03 [PATCH] ACPI/HMAT: Fix the parsing of Cache Associativity and Write Policy Tao Xu
2019-12-09  7:43 ` Tao Xu
2019-12-09  7:55   ` Greg KH
2019-12-09  8:38     ` Tao Xu
2019-12-09 10:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-12-10  1:04   ` Tao Xu
2019-12-10  8:06     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-12-10  8:19       ` Tao Xu [this message]
2019-12-10  8:27         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-12-10 13:18           ` Tao Xu
2019-12-11  3:04             ` Tao Xu
2019-12-11  3:37               ` Dan Williams
2019-12-11  4:27                 ` Tao Xu

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=0e4219c3-943a-e416-e5eb-723bed8c9383@intel.com \
    --to=tao3.xu@intel.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=rafael@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).