From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Subject: [PATCH v1 2/3] arch_topology: Handle inconsistent binding of CPU raw capacity
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2022 13:55:11 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220313055512.248571-3-leo.yan@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220313055512.248571-1-leo.yan@linaro.org>
There have a corner case is if we use below DT binding:
cpu0: cpu@0 {
compatible = "arm,cortex-a53";
device_type = "cpu";
reg = <0x0 0x0>;
enable-method = "psci";
};
cpu1: cpu@1 {
compatible = "arm,cortex-a53";
device_type = "cpu";
reg = <0x0 0x1>;
enable-method = "psci";
capacity-dmips-mhz = <1024>;
};
In this case, CPU0 node misses to bind "capacity-dmips-mhz" property,
and CPU1 node binds the property, this means the CPU raw capacity
binding is inconsistent across all CPUs.
This patch introduces an extra flag 'cap_property_miss' to indicate that
any previous CPU nodes miss binding for "capacity-dmips-mhz" property,
and any new CPU node contains the property, it detects the inconsistent
binding, and sets 'cap_parsing_failed' to true and frees raw capacity
array.
Signed-off-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
---
drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
index b81777ae6425..0687576e880b 100644
--- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
+++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
@@ -294,6 +294,7 @@ bool __init topology_parse_cpu_capacity(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
struct clk *cpu_clk;
int ret;
u32 cpu_capacity;
+ static bool cap_property_miss;
if (cap_parsing_failed)
return false;
@@ -301,6 +302,20 @@ bool __init topology_parse_cpu_capacity(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
ret = of_property_read_u32(cpu_node, "capacity-dmips-mhz",
&cpu_capacity);
if (!ret) {
+ /*
+ * A previous CPU node misses binding for CPU raw capacity and
+ * current CPU node finds its property "capacity-dmips-mhz",
+ * thus the DT binding for "capacity-dmips-mhz" is inconsistent
+ * across all CPUs. Set 'cap_parsing_failed' flag and drop the
+ * CPU raw capacity values.
+ */
+ if (cap_property_miss) {
+ pr_err("cpu_capacity: binding %pOF raw capacity\n",
+ cpu_node);
+ pr_err("cpu_capacity: partial information: fallback to 1024 for all CPUs\n");
+ goto parsing_failure;
+ }
+
if (!raw_capacity) {
raw_capacity = kcalloc(num_possible_cpus(),
sizeof(*raw_capacity),
@@ -331,12 +346,18 @@ bool __init topology_parse_cpu_capacity(struct device_node *cpu_node, int cpu)
pr_err("cpu_capacity: missing %pOF raw capacity\n",
cpu_node);
pr_err("cpu_capacity: partial information: fallback to 1024 for all CPUs\n");
- cap_parsing_failed = true;
- free_raw_capacity();
+ goto parsing_failure;
+ } else {
+ cap_property_miss = true;
}
}
return !ret;
+
+parsing_failure:
+ cap_parsing_failed = true;
+ free_raw_capacity();
+ return !ret;
}
#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ
--
2.25.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-13 5:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-13 5:55 [PATCH v1 0/3] arch_topology: Correct CPU capacity scaling Leo Yan
2022-03-13 5:55 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] arch_topology: Correct semantics for 'cap_parsing_failed' Leo Yan
2022-03-13 5:55 ` Leo Yan [this message]
2022-03-13 5:55 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] arch_topology: Scale CPU capacity if without CPU raw capacity Leo Yan
2022-03-14 18:10 ` [PATCH v1 0/3] arch_topology: Correct CPU capacity scaling Ionela Voinescu
2022-03-15 3:29 ` Leo Yan
2022-03-15 10:08 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-03-15 14:59 ` Leo Yan
2022-03-15 9:49 ` 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=20220313055512.248571-3-leo.yan@linaro.org \
--to=leo.yan@linaro.org \
--cc=bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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).