Re: [PATCH v7 1/7] Documentation: DT: arm: add support for sockets defining package boundaries

From: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
To: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra \(Intel\)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Richard Fontana <rfontana@redhat.com>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>,
	"linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Otto Sabart <ottosabart@seberm.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/7] Documentation: DT: arm: add support for sockets defining package boundaries
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 19:18:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <873a80f0-e704-dd7e-4db9-b159b23847fc@wdc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.9999.1906261724000.23534@viisi.sifive.com>

On 6/26/19 5:31 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> Hi Sudeep, Atish,
> 
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, Atish Patra wrote:
> 
>> From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
>>
>> The current ARM DT topology description provides the operating system
>> with a topological view of the system that is based on leaf nodes
>> representing either cores or threads (in an SMT system) and a
>> hierarchical set of cluster nodes that creates a hierarchical topology
>> view of how those cores and threads are grouped.
>>
>> However this hierarchical representation of clusters does not allow to
>> describe what topology level actually represents the physical package or
>> the socket boundary, which is a key piece of information to be used by
>> an operating system to optimize resource allocation and scheduling.
>>
>> Lets add a new "socket" node type in the cpu-map node to describe the
>> same.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
> 
> This one doesn't apply cleanly here on top of v5.2-rc2, Linus's master
> branch, and next-20190626.  The reject file is below.  Am I missing
> a patch?
> 

That's weird. I could apply the patch from any git tree (github or 
git.kernel.org) but not from mail or patchworks.

git log doesn't show any recent modifications of that file. I am trying 
to figure out what's wrong.
> 
> - Paul
> 
> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> +++ Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> @@ -185,13 +206,15 @@ Bindings for cluster/cpu/thread nodes are defined as follows:
>   4 - Example dts
>   ===========================================
>   
> -Example 1 (ARM 64-bit, 16-cpu system, two clusters of clusters):
> +Example 1 (ARM 64-bit, 16-cpu system, two clusters of clusters in a single
> +physical socket):
>   
>   cpus {
>   	#size-cells = <0>;
>   	#address-cells = <2>;
>   
>   	cpu-map {
> +		socket0 {
>   			cluster0 {
>   				cluster0 {
>   					core0 {
> 

-- 
Regards,
Atish

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