On 14/01/17 02:45, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> It is useful to have helper function just to get the number of cache
>> levels for a given logical cpu. We can obtain the same by just checking
>> the level at which the last cache is present. This patch adds support
>> to find the level of the last cache for a given cpu.
>>
>> It will be used on ARM64 platform where the device tree provides the
>> information for the additional non-architected/transparent/external
>> last level caches that are not integrated with the processors.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/of/base.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/of.h | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+)
>>
>> v1->v2:
>> - Moved to using "cache-level" in the last level cache instead
>> of counting through all the nodes as suggested by Rob
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c
>> index d4bea3c797d6..c1128a077aea 100644
>> --- a/drivers/of/base.c
>> +++ b/drivers/of/base.c
>> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>> #include <linux/cpu.h>
>> #include <linux/module.h>
>> #include <linux/of.h>
>> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>> #include <linux/of_graph.h>
>> #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>> #include <linux/slab.h>
>> @@ -2268,6 +2269,32 @@ struct device_node *of_find_next_cache_node(const struct device_node *np)
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> + * of_find_last_cache_level - Find the level at which the last cache is
>> + * present for the given logical cpu
>> + *
>> + * @cpu: cpu number(logical index) for which the last cache level is needed
>> + *
>> + * Returns the the level at which the last cache is present. It is exactly
>> + * same as the total number of cache levels for the given logical cpu.
>> + */
>> +int of_find_last_cache_level(unsigned int cpu)
>> +{
>> + int cache_level = 0;
>> + struct device_node *prev = NULL, *np = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
>> +
>> + while (np) {
>> + prev = np;
>> + of_node_put(np);
>> + np = of_find_next_cache_node(np);
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (prev)
>
> Probably don't need this check. Otherwise,
>
Sure I will drop the check.
> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
I assume you are fine taking this via arm64 tree. If not, let us know.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
