From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=rI0D=Y6=lists.ozlabs.org=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,
	USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6942C5DF63
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed,  6 Nov 2019 20:17:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 588C0214D8
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed,  6 Nov 2019 20:17:49 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 588C0214D8
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 477dBM1wW6zF5rn
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu,  7 Nov 2019 07:17:47 +1100 (AEDT)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized)
 smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1;
 helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=tyreld@linux.ibm.com;
 receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com
Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com
 [148.163.156.1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 477d8D75DqzF5qB
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Thu,  7 Nov 2019 07:15:56 +1100 (AEDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1])
 by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id
 xA6K9tdr099996; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 15:15:51 -0500
Received: from ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (7a.29.35a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com
 [169.53.41.122])
 by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2w41wcf8jg-1
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT);
 Wed, 06 Nov 2019 15:15:51 -0500
Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1])
 by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id xA6KFKOQ009025;
 Wed, 6 Nov 2019 20:15:50 GMT
Received: from b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com
 (b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.15])
 by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 2w41uj9xt0-1
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT);
 Wed, 06 Nov 2019 20:15:50 +0000
Received: from b03ledav005.gho.boulder.ibm.com
 (b03ledav005.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.236])
 by b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id
 xA6KFmr047972712
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK);
 Wed, 6 Nov 2019 20:15:48 GMT
Received: from b03ledav005.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E67F1BE053;
 Wed,  6 Nov 2019 20:15:47 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from b03ledav005.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D88BE05A;
 Wed,  6 Nov 2019 20:15:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from oc6857751186.ibm.com (unknown [9.160.81.178])
 by b03ledav005.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP;
 Wed,  6 Nov 2019 20:15:46 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] powerpc/pseries: Add cpu DLPAR support for drc-info
 property
To: Thomas Falcon <tlfalcon@linux.ibm.com>, mpe@ellerman.id.au
References: <1572967453-9586-1-git-send-email-tyreld@linux.ibm.com>
 <1572967453-9586-4-git-send-email-tyreld@linux.ibm.com>
 <d0bb5aa2-3a52-5d5b-f5bb-0a1ee90f353a@linux.ibm.com>
From: Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <e470721f-2c74-3765-51a1-611f37a555ff@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:15:45 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d0bb5aa2-3a52-5d5b-f5bb-0a1ee90f353a@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, ,
 definitions=2019-11-06_07:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0
 priorityscore=1501
 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0
 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0
 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx
 scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1910280000 definitions=main-1911060198
X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: nathanl@linux.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
 Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linuxppc-dev"
 <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>

On 11/5/19 8:55 AM, Thomas Falcon wrote:
> 
> On 11/5/19 9:24 AM, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
>> From: Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>
>> Older firmwares provided information about Dynamic Reconfig
>> Connectors (DRC) through several device tree properties, namely
>> ibm,drc-types, ibm,drc-indexes, ibm,drc-names, and
>> ibm,drc-power-domains. New firmwares have the ability to present this
>> same information in a much condensed format through a device tree
>> property called ibm,drc-info.
>>
>> The existing cpu DLPAR hotplug code only understands the older DRC
>> property format when validating the drc-index of a cpu during a
>> hotplug add. This updates those code paths to use the ibm,drc-info
>> property, when present, instead for validation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 85 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
>> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
>> index bbda646..9ba006c 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
>> @@ -407,17 +407,58 @@ static bool dlpar_cpu_exists(struct device_node *parent,
>> u32 drc_index)
>>       return found;
>>   }
>>
>> +static bool drc_info_valid_index(struct device_node *parent, u32 drc_index)
>> +{
>> +    struct property *info;
>> +    struct of_drc_info drc;
>> +    const __be32 *value;
>> +    int count, i, j;
>> +
>> +    info = of_find_property(parent, "ibm,drc-info", NULL);
>> +    if (!info)
>> +        return false;
>> +
>> +    value = of_prop_next_u32(info, NULL, &count);
>> +
>> +    /* First value of ibm,drc-info is number of drc-info records */
>> +    if (value)
>> +        value++;
>> +    else
>> +        return false;
>> +
>> +    for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
>> +        if (of_read_drc_info_cell(&info, &value, &drc))
>> +            return false;
>> +
>> +        if (strncmp(drc.drc_type, "CPU", 3))
>> +            break;
>> +
>> +        if (drc_index > drc.last_drc_index)
>> +            continue;
>> +
>> +        for (j = 0; j < drc.num_sequential_elems; j++)
>> +            if (drc_index == (drc.drc_index_start + (drc.sequential_inc * j)))
>> +                    return true;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    return false;
>> +}
>> +
>>   static bool valid_cpu_drc_index(struct device_node *parent, u32 drc_index)
>>   {
>>       bool found = false;
>>       int rc, index;
>>
>> -    index = 0;
>> +    if (of_find_property(parent, "ibm,drc-info", NULL))
>> +        return drc_info_valid_index(parent, drc_index);
>> +
>> +    index = 1;
> 
> Hi, this change was confusing to me until I continued reading the patch and saw
> the comment below regarding the first element of the ibm,drc-info property. 
> Would it be good to have a similar comment here too?
> 

Yeah, clearly wouldn't hurt. Probably should split it out into a separate fix
prior to this patch.

> 
>>       while (!found) {
>>           u32 drc;
>>
>>           rc = of_property_read_u32_index(parent, "ibm,drc-indexes",
>>                           index++, &drc);
>> +
> 
> Another nitpick but this could be cleaned up.

Yep, noticed the newline addition after I'd already sent it out.

-Tyrel

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
>>           if (rc)
>>               break;
>>
>> @@ -720,8 +761,11 @@ static int dlpar_cpu_remove_by_count(u32 cpus_to_remove)
>>   static int find_dlpar_cpus_to_add(u32 *cpu_drcs, u32 cpus_to_add)
>>   {
>>       struct device_node *parent;
>> +    struct property *info;
>>       int cpus_found = 0;
>>       int index, rc;
>> +    int i, j;
>> +    u32 drc_index;
>>
>>       parent = of_find_node_by_path("/cpus");
>>       if (!parent) {
>> @@ -730,24 +774,49 @@ static int find_dlpar_cpus_to_add(u32 *cpu_drcs, u32
>> cpus_to_add)
>>           return -1;
>>       }
>>
>> -    /* Search the ibm,drc-indexes array for possible CPU drcs to
>> -     * add. Note that the format of the ibm,drc-indexes array is
>> -     * the number of entries in the array followed by the array
>> -     * of drc values so we start looking at index = 1.
>> -     */
>> -    index = 1;
>> -    while (cpus_found < cpus_to_add) {
>> -        u32 drc;
>> +    info = of_find_property(parent, "ibm,drc-info", NULL);
>> +    if (info) {
>> +        struct of_drc_info drc;
>> +        const __be32 *value;
>> +        int count;
>>
>> -        rc = of_property_read_u32_index(parent, "ibm,drc-indexes",
>> -                        index++, &drc);
>> -        if (rc)
>> -            break;
>> +        value = of_prop_next_u32(info, NULL, &count);
>> +        if (value)
>> +            value++;
>>
>> -        if (dlpar_cpu_exists(parent, drc))
>> -            continue;
>> +        for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
>> +            of_read_drc_info_cell(&info, &value, &drc);
>> +            if (strncmp(drc.drc_type, "CPU", 3))
>> +                break;
>> +
>> +            for (j = 0; j < drc.num_sequential_elems && cpus_found <
>> cpus_to_add; j++) {
>> +                drc_index = drc.drc_index_start + (drc.sequential_inc * j);
>> +
>> +                if (dlpar_cpu_exists(parent, drc_index))
>> +                    continue;
>> +
>> +                cpu_drcs[cpus_found++] = drc_index;
>> +            }
>> +        }
>> +    } else {
>> +        /* Search the ibm,drc-indexes array for possible CPU drcs to
>> +         * add. Note that the format of the ibm,drc-indexes array is
>> +         * the number of entries in the array followed by the array
>> +         * of drc values so we start looking at index = 1.
>> +         */
>> +        index = 1;
>> +        while (cpus_found < cpus_to_add) {
>> +            rc = of_property_read_u32_index(parent, "ibm,drc-indexes",
>> +                            index++, &drc_index);
>> +
>> +            if (rc)
>> +                break;
>>
>> -        cpu_drcs[cpus_found++] = drc;
>> +            if (dlpar_cpu_exists(parent, drc_index))
>> +                continue;
>> +
>> +            cpu_drcs[cpus_found++] = drc_index;
>> +        }
>>       }
>>
>>       of_node_put(parent);