From: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux.ibm.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Cedric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/smp: Cache CPU to chip lookup
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 21:27:48 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210416155748.GA26496@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210415175110.GE2633526@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 11:21:10PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [2021-04-15 22:49:21]:
>
> > >
> > > +int *chip_id_lookup_table;
> > > +
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
> > > int __initdata iommu_is_off;
> > > int __initdata iommu_force_on;
> > > @@ -914,13 +916,22 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_get_ibm_chip_id);
> > > int cpu_to_chip_id(int cpu)
> > > {
> > > struct device_node *np;
> > > + int ret = -1, idx;
> > > +
> > > + idx = cpu / threads_per_core;
> > > + if (chip_id_lookup_table && chip_id_lookup_table[idx] != -1)
> >
>
> > The value -1 is ambiguous since we won't be able to determine if
> > it is because we haven't yet made a of_get_ibm_chip_id() call
> > or if of_get_ibm_chip_id() call was made and it returned a -1.
> >
>
> We don't allocate chip_id_lookup_table unless cpu_to_chip_id() return
> !-1 value for the boot-cpuid. So this ensures that we dont
> unnecessarily allocate chip_id_lookup_table. Also I check for
> chip_id_lookup_table before calling cpu_to_chip_id() for other CPUs.
> So this avoids overhead of calling cpu_to_chip_id() for platforms that
> dont support it. Also its most likely that if the
> chip_id_lookup_table is initialized then of_get_ibm_chip_id() call
> would return a valid value.
>
> + Below we are only populating the lookup table, only when the
> of_get_cpu_node is valid.
>
> So I dont see any drawbacks of initializing it to -1. Do you see
any?
Only if other callers of cpu_to_chip_id() don't check for whether the
chip_id_lookup_table() has been allocated or not. From a code
readability point of view, it is easier to have that check this inside
cpu_to_chip_id() instead of requiring all its callers to make that
check.
>
> > Thus, perhaps we can initialize chip_id_lookup_table[idx] with a
> > different unique negative value. How about S32_MIN ? and check
> > chip_id_lookup_table[idx] is different here ?
> >
>
> I had initially initialized to -2, But then I thought we adding in
> more confusion than necessary and it was not solving any issues.
>
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards
> Srikar Dronamraju
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-16 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-15 12:09 [PATCH 0/3] Reintroduce cpu_core_mask Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-15 12:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] powerpc/smp: " Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-15 17:11 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2021-04-15 17:36 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-16 3:21 ` David Gibson
2021-04-16 5:45 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-19 1:17 ` David Gibson
2021-04-15 12:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] Revert "powerpc/topology: Update topology_core_cpumask" Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-15 12:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/smp: Cache CPU to chip lookup Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-15 17:19 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2021-04-15 17:51 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-16 15:57 ` Gautham R Shenoy [this message]
2021-04-16 16:57 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2021-04-19 1:19 ` David Gibson
2021-04-15 12:17 ` [PATCH 0/3] Reintroduce cpu_core_mask Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-04-19 4:00 ` Michael Ellerman
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=20210416155748.GA26496@in.ibm.com \
--to=ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=clg@kaod.org \
--cc=danielhb413@gmail.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=nathanl@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=valentin.schneider@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
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).