From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Radu Rendec <rrendec@redhat.com>,
Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>,
Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] cacheinfo: Check cache properties are present in DT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:21:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <18da7eec-3898-06fb-2746-c201450389ac@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230414090542.rbidu45cx4halja4@bogus>
On 4/14/23 02:05, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 01:06:46PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 4/13/23 12:50, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 11:16:37AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>> On 4/13/23 02:14, Pierre Gondois wrote:
>>>>> If a Device Tree (DT) is used, the presence of cache properties is
>>>>> assumed. Not finding any is not considered. For arm64 platforms,
>>>>> cache information can be fetched from the clidr_el1 register.
>>>>> Checking whether cache information is available in the DT
>>>>> allows to switch to using clidr_el1.
>>>>>
>>>>> init_of_cache_level()
>>>>> \-of_count_cache_leaves()
>>>>> will assume there a 2 cache leaves (L1 data/instruction caches), which
>>>>> can be different from clidr_el1 information.
>>>>>
>>>>> cache_setup_of_node() tries to read cache properties in the DT.
>>>>> If there are none, this is considered a success. Knowing no
>>>>> information was available would allow to switch to using clidr_el1.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: de0df442ee49 ("cacheinfo: Check 'cache-unified' property to count cache leaves")
>>>>> Reported-by: Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230404-hatred-swimmer-6fecdf33b57a@spud/
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
>>>>
>>>> Humm, it would appear that the cache levels and topology is still provided,
>>>> despite the lack of cache properties in the Device Tree which is intended by
>>>> this patch set however we lost the size/ways/sets information, could we not
>>>> complement the missing properties here?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am confused. How and from where the information was fetched before this
>>> change ?
>>
>> I applied Pierre's patches to my tree and then did the following:
>>
>> - before means booting with the patches applied and the Device Tree
>> providing cache information: {d,i}-cache-{size,line-size,sets} and
>> next-level-cache
>>
>> - after means removing all of those properties still with the patches
>> applied
>>
>
> Ah okay, I assumed something totally different and hence thought patches
> broke something.
>
>> My expectation is that if we omit the properties in the Device Tree, we will
>> fallback to reading that information out of clidr_el1. However as can be
>> seen from the "before" and "after" outputs, there is loss of information, as
>> we no longer have the cacheline size, number of sets/ways, the rest is valid
>> though.
>>
>
> Correct and that is expected. We dropped ccsidr_el1 support to fetch cache
> geometry with the commit a8d4636f96ad ("arm64: cacheinfo: Remove CCSIDR-based
> cache information probing") after Arm ARM added wordings not to infer the
> information. However clidr_el1 info still holds except it may not include
> transparent system level caches. Hope that clarifies.
Yes it definitively does, thanks a lot for the refresher.
--
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-14 22:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-13 9:14 [PATCH v3 0/4] cacheinfo: Correctly fallback to using clidr_el1's information Pierre Gondois
2023-04-13 9:14 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] cacheinfo: Check sib_leaf in cache_leaves_are_shared() Pierre Gondois
2023-04-13 10:04 ` Conor Dooley
2023-04-13 9:14 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] cacheinfo: Check cache properties are present in DT Pierre Gondois
2023-04-13 10:06 ` Conor Dooley
2023-04-13 18:16 ` Florian Fainelli
2023-04-13 19:50 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-04-13 20:06 ` Florian Fainelli
2023-04-14 7:33 ` Pierre Gondois
2023-04-14 9:05 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-04-14 22:21 ` Florian Fainelli [this message]
2023-04-14 8:19 ` Pierre Gondois
2023-04-13 9:14 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] arch_topology: Remove early cacheinfo error message Pierre Gondois
2023-04-13 10:02 ` Conor Dooley
2023-04-13 10:25 ` Conor Dooley
2023-04-13 15:25 ` Pierre Gondois
2023-04-13 16:23 ` Conor Dooley
2023-04-13 9:14 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] cacheinfo: Add use_arch[|_cache]_info field/function Pierre Gondois
2023-04-13 9:49 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-04-13 10:17 ` Pierre Gondois
2023-04-13 10:20 ` Sudeep Holla
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=18da7eec-3898-06fb-2746-c201450389ac@gmail.com \
--to=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=alexghiti@rivosinc.com \
--cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@rivosinc.com \
--cc=pierre.gondois@arm.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rrendec@redhat.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®