On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 2:47 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 December 2014 13:03:27 Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>> +
>> + memory@00000000 {
>> + device_type = "memory";
>> + reg = <0x0 0x00000000 0x0 0x80000000>;
>> + /* board 0, socket 0, no specific core */
>> + arm,associativity = <0 0 0xffff>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + memory@10000000000 {
>> + device_type = "memory";
>> + reg = <0x100 0x00000000 0x0 0x80000000>;
>> + /* board 1, socket 0, no specific core */
>> + arm,associativity = <1 0 0xffff>;
>> + };
>> +};
>
> So no memory in any other socket?
>
>> + cpu@00f {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "cavium,thunder", "arm,armv8";
>> + reg = <0x0 0x00f>;
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + arm,associativity = <0 0 0x00f>;
>> + };
>> + cpu@100 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "cavium,thunder", "arm,armv8";
>> + reg = <0x0 0x100>;
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + arm,associativity = <0 0 0x100>;
>> + };
>
> What is the 0x100 offset in the last-level topology field? Does this have
> no significance to topology at all? I would expect that to be something
> like cluster number that is relevant to caching and should be represented
> as a separate level.
i did not understand, can you please explain little more about "
should be represented as a separate level."
at present, i have put the hwid of a cpu.
>
> In contrast, the level-two topology information seems to always be
> zero for all CPUs, so you could probably leave that one out.
>
>> + soc {
>> + compatible = "simple-bus";
>> + #address-cells = <2>;
>> + #size-cells = <2>;
>> + ranges;
>
> The soc node is missing a topology information, please add one.
ok, will be added.
>
> Arnd
thanks
ganapat
--
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
