From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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=-20.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 C46FCC433DB for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 09:41:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (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 72D7060202 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 09:41:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 72D7060202 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:53372 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lGf2z-0007Yl-BV for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 01 Mar 2021 04:41:01 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60144) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lGf1j-0006xj-SI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Mar 2021 04:39:46 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:36613) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lGf1h-0001QR-4l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 01 Mar 2021 04:39:43 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1614591578; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qY3oJvW8QwYMDLkONjlnZJ5gOHQb+ZkcY2t/a2UNb/Q=; b=WwnF5jV2xSYKAVF/ahMNkgiKkvCOzE2WnqW3fjNijckKhVqhzOFBzEPzWBjR1upCmaqWbx wGsnyRnihkoaPHBBmj952++ScMx3pgjZZo3vU55eYQKGIe0U5x6Gkq70NoH0Yjn7ilzkIL Tcd/yfz6ofmh8JadPgOc/1EMMqQ8vQw= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-602-dOhavX5MP4WNzL2W6lXSEg-1; Mon, 01 Mar 2021 04:39:34 -0500 X-MC-Unique: dOhavX5MP4WNzL2W6lXSEg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03383801975; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 09:39:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kamzik.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.40.194.228]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1958E60636; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 09:39:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2021 10:39:19 +0100 From: Andrew Jones To: Ying Fang Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] hw/acpi/aml-build: add processor hierarchy node structure Message-ID: <20210301093919.yt65iz26p6niairw@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> References: <20210225085627.2263-1-fangying1@huawei.com> <20210225085627.2263-5-fangying1@huawei.com> <20210225114732.5f7gqgl7lym7d4hs@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> <5afc6d2b-6e16-d44c-13cf-bd75c63f89db@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5afc6d2b-6e16-d44c-13cf-bd75c63f89db@huawei.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=drjones@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=63.128.21.124; envelope-from=drjones@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -30 X-Spam_score: -3.1 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.248, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, salil.mehta@huawei.com, zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com, mst@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, shannon.zhaosl@gmail.com, Henglong Fan , alistair.francis@wdc.com, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, imammedo@redhat.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 10:23:03AM +0800, Ying Fang wrote: > > > On 2/25/2021 7:47 PM, Andrew Jones wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 04:56:26PM +0800, Ying Fang wrote: > > > Add the processor hierarchy node structures to build ACPI information > > > for CPU topology. Since the private resources may be used to describe > > > cache hierarchy and it is variable among different topology level, > > > three helpers are introduced to describe the hierarchy. > > > > > > (1) build_socket_hierarchy for socket description > > > (2) build_processor_hierarchy for processor description > > > (3) build_smt_hierarchy for thread (logic processor) description > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ying Fang > > > Signed-off-by: Henglong Fan > > > --- > > > hw/acpi/aml-build.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h | 13 ++++++++++++ > > > include/hw/acpi/aml-build.h | 7 +++++++ > > > 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/hw/acpi/aml-build.c b/hw/acpi/aml-build.c > > > index a2cd7a5830..a0af3e9d73 100644 > > > --- a/hw/acpi/aml-build.c > > > +++ b/hw/acpi/aml-build.c > > > @@ -1888,6 +1888,46 @@ void build_slit(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker, MachineState *ms, > > > table_data->len - slit_start, 1, oem_id, oem_table_id); > > > } > > > +/* > > > + * ACPI 6.3: 5.2.29.1 Processor hierarchy node structure (Type 0) > > > + */ > > > +void build_socket_hierarchy(GArray *tbl, uint32_t parent, uint32_t id) > > > +{ > > > + build_append_byte(tbl, ACPI_PPTT_TYPE_PROCESSOR); /* Type 0 - processor */ > > > + build_append_byte(tbl, 20); /* Length, no private resources */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, 0, 2); /* Reserved */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, ACPI_PPTT_PHYSICAL_PACKAGE, 4); > > > > Missing '/* Flags */' > > Will fix. > > > > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, parent, 4); /* Parent */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, id, 4); /* ACPI processor ID */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, 0, 4); /* Number of private resources */ > > > +} > > > + > > > +void build_processor_hierarchy(GArray *tbl, uint32_t flags, > > > + uint32_t parent, uint32_t id) > > > +{ > > > + build_append_byte(tbl, ACPI_PPTT_TYPE_PROCESSOR); /* Type 0 - processor */ > > > + build_append_byte(tbl, 20); /* Length, no private resources */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, 0, 2); /* Reserved */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, flags, 4); /* Flags */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, parent, 4); /* Parent */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, id, 4); /* ACPI processor ID */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, 0, 4); /* Number of private resources */ > > > +} > > > + > > > +void build_thread_hierarchy(GArray *tbl, uint32_t parent, uint32_t id) > > > +{ > > > + build_append_byte(tbl, ACPI_PPTT_TYPE_PROCESSOR); /* Type 0 - processor */ > > > + build_append_byte(tbl, 20); /* Length, no private resources */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, 0, 2); /* Reserved */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, > > > + ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID | > > > + ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_IS_THREAD | > > > + ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_LEAF_NODE, 4); /* Flags */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, parent , 4); /* parent */ > > > > 'parent' not capitalized. We want these comments to exactly match the text > > in the spec. > > Will fix. > > > > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, id, 4); /* ACPI processor ID */ > > > + build_append_int_noprefix(tbl, 0, 4); /* Num of private resources */ > > > +} > > > + > > > /* build rev1/rev3/rev5.1 FADT */ > > > void build_fadt(GArray *tbl, BIOSLinker *linker, const AcpiFadtData *f, > > > const char *oem_id, const char *oem_table_id) > > > diff --git a/include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h b/include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h > > > index cf9f44299c..45e10d886f 100644 > > > --- a/include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h > > > +++ b/include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h > > > @@ -618,4 +618,17 @@ struct AcpiIortRC { > > > } QEMU_PACKED; > > > typedef struct AcpiIortRC AcpiIortRC; > > > +enum { > > > + ACPI_PPTT_TYPE_PROCESSOR = 0, > > > + ACPI_PPTT_TYPE_CACHE, > > > + ACPI_PPTT_TYPE_ID, > > > + ACPI_PPTT_TYPE_RESERVED > > > +}; > > > + > > > +#define ACPI_PPTT_PHYSICAL_PACKAGE (1) > > > +#define ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_ID_VALID (1 << 1) > > > +#define ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_PROCESSOR_IS_THREAD (1 << 2) /* ACPI 6.3 */ > > > +#define ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_LEAF_NODE (1 << 3) /* ACPI 6.3 */ > > > +#define ACPI_PPTT_ACPI_IDENTICAL (1 << 4) /* ACPI 6.3 */ > > > + > > > #endif > > > diff --git a/include/hw/acpi/aml-build.h b/include/hw/acpi/aml-build.h > > > index 380d3e3924..7f0ca1a198 100644 > > > --- a/include/hw/acpi/aml-build.h > > > +++ b/include/hw/acpi/aml-build.h > > > @@ -462,6 +462,13 @@ void build_srat_memory(AcpiSratMemoryAffinity *numamem, uint64_t base, > > > void build_slit(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker, MachineState *ms, > > > const char *oem_id, const char *oem_table_id); > > > +void build_socket_hierarchy(GArray *tbl, uint32_t parent, uint32_t id); > > > + > > > +void build_processor_hierarchy(GArray *tbl, uint32_t flags, > > > + uint32_t parent, uint32_t id); > > > + > > > +void build_thread_hierarchy(GArray *tbl, uint32_t parent, uint32_t id); > > > > Why does build_processor_hierarchy() take a flags argument, but the > > others don't? Why not just have a single 'flags' taking function, > > like [*] that works for all of them? I think that answer to that is > > Yes, you are right. > > > that when cache topology support is added it's better to break these > > into separate functions, but should we do that now? It seems odd to > > be introducing unused defines and this API before it's necessary. > So it is better for us to keep just one common build_processor_hierarchy > API here in your opinion. Well, a consistent API without unused defines. Whether or not that's a single common function or not isn't that important. Thanks, drew > > > > > [*] https://github.com/rhdrjones/qemu/commit/439b38d67ca1f2cbfa5b9892a822b651ebd05c11 > > > > Thanks, > > drew > > > > > + > > > void build_fadt(GArray *tbl, BIOSLinker *linker, const AcpiFadtData *f, > > > const char *oem_id, const char *oem_table_id); > > > -- > > > 2.23.0 > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > Thanks, > Ying. >