Hi Greg, On 13/02/14 15:55, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 11/02/14 00:13, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 06:09:58PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>> On 07/02/14 19:29, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>> On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 04:49:16PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>>>> From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> This patch adds initial support for providing processor cache information >>>>> to userspace through sysfs interface. This is based on already existing >>>>> implementations(x86, ia64, s390 and powerpc) and hence the interface is >>>>> intended to be fully compatible. >>>>> >>>>> The main purpose of this generic support is to avoid further code >>>>> duplication to support new architectures and also to unify all the existing >>>>> different implementations. >>>>> >>>>> This implementation maintains the hierarchy of cache objects which reflects >>>>> the system's cache topology. Cache objects are instantiated as needed as >>>>> CPUs come online. The cache objects are replicated per-cpu even if they are >>>>> shared. A per-cpu array of cache information maintained is used mainly for >>>>> sysfs-related book keeping. >>>> >>>> I thought I asked that you not use "raw" kobjects for this, instead >>>> using 'struct device' or just an attribute group? >>>> >>> >>> Correct, sorry I should have mentioned here instead of cover letter that it's >>> not yet done. Since the changes involved other architectures, I posted v2 to get >>> early feedback and testing. More over it's one place to fix now instead of 4 >>> unlike before. >> >> Ok, I'll wait to review it after you do the device conversion. >> >>> Just adding cache as a device as you suggested won't suffice here. As we need to >>> track multiple cache indices for each cpu, devices are needed for each cache >>> index. I tried using device_create_with_groups which provides all we need in one >>> api for cache indices but since cpu devices are not associated with any class, >>> it fails if class is NULL. Any suggestions ? >> >> Make the cpu devices be part of a class? > > I was able to convert these to use struct device instead of raw kobjects. But it > requires some changes in order to retain the existing sysfs path mainly due to > the fact that cpus are using legacy subsys_system_register and introducing > cpu_class conflicts with cpu bus. The base changes in the driver core is as > below. Is this acceptable ? or any other alternate suggestions ? > Any feedback on this ? If this is acceptable I can post my changes converting raw kobjects to devices attributes along with this change in a separate patch. Regards, Sudeep -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
