From: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com,
alankao@andestech.com, Zong Li <zong@andestech.com>,
Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] dt-bindings: topology: Add RISC-V cpu topology.
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:10:36 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqJOxdE=gD4MyKuL5XZ57Z6UdM4_SU4qs26BNz6YcqM76A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20181105201036.m-pqG4cOvoVVrUZFMIW3fw5YbXhMrmn9NbJnQ0zCnag@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-799bd6f4-e4af-481e-90d8-bdc0e30f2530@palmer-si-x1c4>
On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:39 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2018 06:09:39 PDT (-0700), robh+dt@kernel.org wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 6:04 PM Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Define a RISC-V cpu topology. This is based on cpu-map in ARM world.
> >> But it doesn't need a separate thread node for defining SMT systems.
> >> Multiple cpu phandle properties can be parsed to identify the sibling
> >> hardware threads. Moreover, we do not have cluster concept in RISC-V.
> >> So package is a better word choice than cluster for RISC-V.
> >
> > There was a proposal to add package info for ARM recently. Not sure
> > what happened to that, but we don't need 2 different ways.
> >
> > There's never going to be clusters for RISC-V? What prevents that?
> > Seems shortsighted to me.
> >
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
> >> ---
> >> .../devicetree/bindings/riscv/topology.txt | 154 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 154 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/topology.txt
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/topology.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/topology.txt
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 00000000..96039ed3
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/topology.txt
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,154 @@
> >> +===========================================
> >> +RISC-V cpu topology binding description
> >> +===========================================
> >> +
> >> +===========================================
> >> +1 - Introduction
> >> +===========================================
> >> +
> >> +In a RISC-V system, the hierarchy of CPUs can be defined through following nodes that
> >> +are used to describe the layout of physical CPUs in the system:
> >> +
> >> +- packages
> >> +- core
> >> +
> >> +The cpu nodes (bindings defined in [1]) represent the devices that
> >> +correspond to physical CPUs and are to be mapped to the hierarchy levels.
> >> +Simultaneous multi-threading (SMT) systems can also represent their topology
> >> +by defining multiple cpu phandles inside core node. The details are explained
> >> +in paragraph 3.
> >
> > I don't see a reason to do this differently than ARM. That said, I
> > don't think the thread part is in use on ARM, so it could possibly be
> > changed.
> >
> >> +
> >> +The remainder of this document provides the topology bindings for ARM, based
> >
> > for ARM?
> >
> >> +on the Devicetree Specification, available from:
> >> +
> >> +https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/
> >> +
> >> +If not stated otherwise, whenever a reference to a cpu node phandle is made its
> >> +value must point to a cpu node compliant with the cpu node bindings as
> >> +documented in [1].
> >> +A topology description containing phandles to cpu nodes that are not compliant
> >> +with bindings standardized in [1] is therefore considered invalid.
> >> +
> >> +This cpu topology binding description is mostly based on the topology defined
> >> +in ARM [2].
> >> +===========================================
> >> +2 - cpu-topology node
> >
> > cpu-map. Why change this?
> >
> > What I would like to see is the ARM topology binding reworked to be
> > common or some good reasons why it doesn't work for RISC-V as-is.
>
> I think it would be great if CPU topologies were not a RISC-V specific thing.
> We don't really do anything different than anyone else, so it'd be great if we
> could all share the same spec and code. Looking quickly at the ARM cpu-map
> bindings, I don't see any reason why we can't just use the same thing on RISC-V
> -- it's not quite how I'd do it, but I don't think the differences are worth
> having another implementation. Mechanically I'm not sure how to do this:
> should there just be a "Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpu-map.txt"?
Yes, but ".../bindings/cpu/cpu-topology.txt".
And if we need $arch extensions, they can be moved there. (Really, I'd
like to get rid of /bindings/$arch/* except for maybe a few things.)
> If everyone is OK with that then I vote we just go ahead and genericise the ARM
> "cpu-map" stuff for CPU topology. Sharing the implementation looks fairly
> straight-forward as well.
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-05 20:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-01 23:04 [RFC 0/2] Add RISC-V cpu topology Atish Patra
2018-11-01 23:04 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-01 23:04 ` [RFC 1/2] dt-bindings: topology: " Atish Patra
2018-11-01 23:04 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-02 13:09 ` Rob Herring
2018-11-02 13:09 ` Rob Herring
2018-11-02 13:31 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-02 13:31 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-02 15:11 ` Rob Herring
2018-11-02 15:11 ` Rob Herring
2018-11-02 15:50 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-02 15:50 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-02 20:53 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-02 20:53 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-02 21:08 ` Rob Herring
2018-11-02 21:08 ` Rob Herring
2018-11-02 20:34 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-02 20:34 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-05 19:38 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-11-05 19:38 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-11-05 20:10 ` Rob Herring [this message]
2018-11-05 20:10 ` Rob Herring
2018-11-06 0:12 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-06 0:12 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-06 10:03 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-06 10:03 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-06 11:37 ` Mark Rutland
2018-11-06 11:37 ` Mark Rutland
2018-11-01 23:04 ` [RFC 2/2] RISC-V: Introduce " Atish Patra
2018-11-01 23:04 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-02 18:58 ` [RFC 0/2] Add RISC-V " Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-02 18:58 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-02 21:14 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-02 21:14 ` Atish Patra
2018-11-02 22:18 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-02 22:18 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-06 14:13 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-06 14:13 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-06 15:26 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-06 15:26 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-06 15:50 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-06 15:50 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-06 16:20 ` Mark Rutland
2018-11-06 16:20 ` Mark Rutland
2018-11-07 2:31 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-07 2:31 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-07 12:06 ` Mark Rutland
2018-11-07 12:06 ` Mark Rutland
2018-11-08 13:45 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-08 13:45 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-08 15:54 ` Mark Rutland
2018-11-08 15:54 ` Mark Rutland
2018-11-09 3:55 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-09 3:55 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-07 12:28 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-07 12:28 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-08 14:52 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-08 14:52 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-08 16:48 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-08 16:48 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-09 2:36 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-09 2:36 ` Nick Kossifidis
2018-11-09 12:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2018-11-09 12:33 ` Sudeep Holla
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='CAL_JsqJOxdE=gD4MyKuL5XZ57Z6UdM4_SU4qs26BNz6YcqM76A@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com \
--cc=alankao@andestech.com \
--cc=anup@brainfault.org \
--cc=atish.patra@wdc.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=palmer@sifive.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zong@andestech.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 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).