Re: [RFT/RFC PATCH v3 3/5] cpu-topology: Move cpu topology code to common code.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/16/19 6:23 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 03:08:45PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
On 4/15/19 8:27 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Hi Atish,

Thanks again for doing this. Overall changes look good except a couple
of minor nit, see below.

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 04:48:04PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
Both RISC-V & ARM64 are using cpu-map device tree to describe
their cpu topology. It's better to move the relevant code to
a common place instead of duplicate code.

Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@xxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   arch/arm64/include/asm/topology.h |  23 ---
   arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c      | 303 +-----------------------------
   drivers/base/arch_topology.c      | 298 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
   drivers/base/topology.c           |   1 +
   include/linux/arch_topology.h     |  28 +++
   5 files changed, 330 insertions(+), 323 deletions(-)


[...]

diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
index edfcf8d9..6cc6a860 100644
--- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
+++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
@@ -6,8 +6,8 @@
    * Written by: Juri Lelli, ARM Ltd.
    */
-#include <linux/acpi.h>
   #include <linux/arch_topology.h>
+#include <linux/acpi.h>
   #include <linux/cpu.h>
   #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
   #include <linux/device.h>
@@ -16,6 +16,11 @@
   #include <linux/string.h>
   #include <linux/sched/topology.h>
   #include <linux/cpuset.h>
+#include <linux/cpumask.h>
+#include <linux/init.h>
+#include <linux/percpu.h>
+#include <linux/sched.h>
+#include <linux/smp.h>
   DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, freq_scale) = SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE;
@@ -278,3 +283,294 @@ static void parsing_done_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
   #else
   core_initcall(free_raw_capacity);
   #endif
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_ARM64) || defined(CONFIG_RISCV)

Why can't the above one be just GENERIC_ARCH_TOPOLOGY ?
I may be missing to find it myself, but would like to know.

GENERIC_ARCH_TOPOLOGY is now used for both RISCV, ARM & ARM64.
The below functions under this #ifdef have different implementation for ARM
and ARM64.

parse_dt_topology
cpu_coregroup_mask
update_siblings_masks

While we can combine the later two functions and move them to common code as
well, parse_dt_topology is significantly different.


Sure, had a quick glance and indeed they may look different, but won't
it defeat the purpose of this binding consolidation ?

I didn't want change too much at first go.

That's why we need some kind of #ifdef or renaming of parse_dt_topology for
ARM32 code.


I am fine if we want to take this up later to keep the impact minimum.
But cpu_coregroup_mask and update_siblings_masks can and must be unified.

Sure. I will just leave parse_dt_topology as it is for now and unify other two functions.

I think we should unify parse_dt_topology in separate series.

Regards,
Atish
In fact the existing generic version must work on ARM32 too.

Thanks for the review!!


You are welcome.

--
Regards,
Sudeep





[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux