Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
To: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	sudeep.holla@arm.com, lenb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ACPI/PPTT: Add support for ACPI 6.3 thread flag
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 10:21:49 -0500
Message-ID: <b7877a38-6c30-af7d-f627-1618684afb55@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <63f6c6a8-9d79-ae75-3c15-96bded9b14e4@huawei.com>

Hi,

On 6/19/19 4:15 AM, John Garry wrote:
> On 18/06/2019 22:28, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 6/18/19 12:23 PM, John Garry wrote:
>>> On 18/06/2019 15:40, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>>> On 18/06/2019 15:21, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> + * Return: -ENOENT if the PPTT doesn't exist, the CPU cannot be
>>>>>>> found or
>>>>>>> + *       the table revision isn't new enough.
>>>>>>> + * Otherwise returns flag value
>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nit: strictly speaking we're not returning the flag value but its 
>>>>>> mask
>>>>>> applied to the flags field. I don't think anyone will care about
>>>>>> getting
>>>>>> the actual flag value, but it should be made obvious in the doc:
>>>>>
>>>>> Or I clarify the code to actually do what the comments says. Maybe
>>>>> that is what John G was also pointing out too?
>>>>>
>>>
>>> No, I was just saying that the kernel topology can be broken without
>>> this series.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mmm I didn't find any reply from John regarding this in v1, but I
>>>> wouldn't
>>>> mind either way, as long as the doc & code are aligned.
>>>>
>>>
>>> BTW, to me, function acpi_pptt_cpu_is_thread() seems to try to do too
>>> much, i.e. check if the PPTT is new enough to support the thread flag
>>> and also check if it is set for a specific cpu. I'd consider separate
>>> functions here.
>>
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> ? Your suggesting replacing the
>>
> 
> I am not saying definitely that this should be changed, it's just that 
> acpi_pptt_cpu_is_thread() returning false, true, or "no entry" is not a 
> typical API format.
> 
> How about acpi_pptt_support_thread_info(cpu) and 
> acpi_pptt_cpu_is_threaded(cpu), both returning false/true only?

I'm not sure we want to be exporting what is effectively a version check 
into the rest of the code. Plus, AFAIK it doesn't really simplify 
anything except the case of ACPI machines with revision 1 PPTTs, because 
those would only be doing a single check and assuming the state of the 
MT bit. That MT check is suspect anyway, although AFAIK it gets the 
right answer on all machines that predate ACPI 6.3..


> 
> None of this is ideal.
> 
> BTW, Have you audited which arm64 systems have MT bit set legitimately?

Not formally, given I don't have access to everything available.

> 
>>
>> if (table->revision >= rev)
> 
> I know that checking the table revision is not on the fast path, but it 
> seems unnecessarily inefficient to always read it this way, I mean 
> calling acpi_table_get().
> 
> Can you have a static value for the table revision? Or is this just how 
> other table info is accessed in ACPI code?

Yes caching the revision internally would save a get/put per core, for 
older machines. I don't think its a big deal in normal operation but its 
a couple extra lines so...

I will post it with an internally cached saved_pptt_rev. That will save 
CPU count get/puts in the case where the revision isn't new enough.


> 
>>     cpu_node = acpi_find_processor_node(table, acpi_cpu_id);
>>
>> check with
>>
>> if (revision_check(table, rev))
>>     cpu_node = acpi_find_processor_node(table, acpi_cpu_id);
>>
>>
>> and a function like
>>
>> static int revision_check(acpixxxx *table, int rev)
>> {
>>     return (table->revision >= rev);
>> }
>>
>> Although, frankly if one were to do this, it should probably be a macro
>> with the table type, and used in the dozen or so other places I found
>> doing similar checks (spcr, iort, etc).
>>
>> Or something else?
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> thanks,
> John

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

  reply index

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-14 22:31 [PATCH v2 0/2] arm64/PPTT ACPI 6.3 thread flag support Jeremy Linton
2019-06-14 22:31 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ACPI/PPTT: Add support for ACPI 6.3 thread flag Jeremy Linton
2019-06-17 12:34   ` Valentin Schneider
2019-06-18 14:21     ` Jeremy Linton
2019-06-18 14:40       ` Valentin Schneider
2019-06-18 17:23         ` John Garry
2019-06-18 21:28           ` Jeremy Linton
2019-06-19  9:15             ` John Garry
2019-06-28 15:21               ` Jeremy Linton [this message]
2019-06-25 15:20     ` Sudeep Holla
2019-06-14 22:31 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: topology: Use PPTT to determine if PE is a thread Jeremy Linton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=b7877a38-6c30-af7d-f627-1618684afb55@arm.com \
    --to=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=john.garry@huawei.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=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.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

Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/0 linux-arm-kernel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1 linux-arm-kernel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-arm-kernel linux-arm-kernel/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel \
		linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
	public-inbox-index linux-arm-kernel

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git