From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
To: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Limit the number of processor bootup messages
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:22:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091112222200.GA19109@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AEF3143.2030701@sgi.com>
On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 11:21:39AM -0800, Mike Travis wrote:
> >> [ 90.981402] CPU: L1 I cache: 32K, L1 D cache: 32K
> >> [ 90.985888] CPU: L2 cache: 256K
> >> [ 90.988032] CPU: L3 cache: 24576K
> >
> > I would recommend to drop the cache information; this can be easily
> > gotten at runtime and is often implied in the CPU name anyways
> > (and especially L1 and increasingly L2 too change only very rarely)
>
> Ok, though because of future system upgrades to a UV system, you can
> end up with slightly different processors (of the same family). The
> only differences I've detected so far in testing is the stepping has
> changed.
I happened to be annoyed by dozens of these three printk's earlier,
and hacked up the following (currently untested) patch.
But I don't disagree with Andi either, that it's not particularly useful,
and we can get all this from userspace in /proc/cpuinfo, or x86info.
If someone still finds it valuable to have the kernel keep printing it
though, perhaps something like the following ?
Dave
On processors with a large number of cores, we print dozens of lines of information about
the CPU cache topology, most of which is unnecessary.
This patch reduces spew a lot (down to a single line unless someone uses a mix of processors
with different cache sizes)
- Check if the total cache size on APs is equal to the boot processors cache size.
Print nothing if equal.
- The three printk's will fit on one line.
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
index 804c40e..cc4f44d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c
@@ -358,9 +362,9 @@ unsigned int __cpuinit init_intel_cacheinfo(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_HT
unsigned int cpu = c->cpu_index;
#endif
+ static int is_initialized;
if (c->cpuid_level > 3) {
- static int is_initialized;
if (is_initialized == 0) {
/* Init num_cache_leaves from boot CPU */
@@ -488,6 +492,21 @@ unsigned int __cpuinit init_intel_cacheinfo(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
#endif
}
+ c->x86_cache_size = l3 ? l3 : (l2 ? l2 : (l1i+l1d));
+
+ /*
+ * cache topology on all AP's is likely equal to that of the BP
+ * if this is the case, don't bother printing anything out for the AP's.
+ */
+ if (is_initialized != 0) {
+ if (c->x86_cache_size == boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_size)
+ return l2;
+ else
+ printk(KERN_INFO "CPU: AP has different cache size (%d) to BP (%d)\n",
+ c->x86_cache_size,
+ boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_size);
+ }
+
if (trace)
printk(KERN_INFO "CPU: Trace cache: %dK uops", trace);
else if (l1i)
@@ -495,16 +512,12 @@ unsigned int __cpuinit init_intel_cacheinfo(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
if (l1d)
printk(KERN_CONT ", L1 D cache: %dK\n", l1d);
- else
- printk(KERN_CONT "\n");
if (l2)
- printk(KERN_INFO "CPU: L2 cache: %dK\n", l2);
+ printk(KERN_CONT ", L2 cache: %dK\n", l2);
if (l3)
- printk(KERN_INFO "CPU: L3 cache: %dK\n", l3);
-
- c->x86_cache_size = l3 ? l3 : (l2 ? l2 : (l1i+l1d));
+ printk(KERN_CONT ", L3 cache: %dK\n", l3);
return l2;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-12 22:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 109+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20091023233743.439628000@alcatraz.americas.sgi.com>
2009-10-23 23:37 ` [PATCH 1/8] SGI x86_64 UV: Add limit console output function Mike Travis
2009-10-24 1:09 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-10-26 17:55 ` Mike Travis
2009-11-02 14:15 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-10-26 7:02 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-26 16:10 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-10-26 18:05 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 18:51 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-10-26 18:03 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 21:55 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-26 22:07 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-30 19:25 ` [PATCH] x86_64: Limit the number of processor bootup messages Mike Travis
2009-10-30 19:54 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-30 20:39 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-30 23:30 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-31 0:27 ` Mike Travis
2009-11-02 11:11 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-02 19:21 ` Mike Travis
2009-11-02 19:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-02 20:32 ` Mike Travis
2009-11-04 0:22 ` Mike Travis
2009-11-04 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-04 10:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-12 22:22 ` Dave Jones [this message]
2009-11-12 22:57 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-11-12 23:15 ` Dave Jones
2009-11-13 8:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-13 8:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-11-13 8:18 ` [tip:x86/debug] x86: Remove the CPU cache size printk's tip-bot for Dave Jones
2009-11-13 22:38 ` [PATCH] x86: Remove CPU cache size output for non-Intel too Roland Dreier
2009-11-13 22:52 ` Dave Jones
2009-11-14 0:54 ` [tip:x86/debug] " tip-bot for Roland Dreier
2009-11-13 16:10 ` [PATCH] x86_64: Limit the number of processor bootup messages Mike Travis
2009-11-14 0:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-23 23:37 ` [PATCH 2/8] SGI x86_64 UV: " Mike Travis
2009-10-26 7:26 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-23 23:37 ` [PATCH 3/8] SGI x86_64 UV: Limit the number of number of SRAT messages Mike Travis
2009-10-26 7:04 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-26 18:08 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-27 15:24 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-27 19:45 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-27 20:00 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-27 20:25 ` [patch] x86: reduce srat verbosity in the kernel log David Rientjes
2009-10-27 20:42 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-27 20:48 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-27 23:02 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-28 3:29 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-28 4:08 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 3:53 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-10-28 4:08 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-27 20:55 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-10-27 21:06 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-27 21:10 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-10-28 3:32 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-28 4:08 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 4:11 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-28 4:53 ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
2009-10-28 5:19 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-28 5:24 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-10 21:08 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-10 21:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-10 21:42 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-11-10 21:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-10 23:09 ` Mike Travis
2009-11-12 20:56 ` David Rientjes
2009-11-12 21:14 ` Mike Travis
2009-11-12 21:20 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 17:02 ` [patch] " Mike Travis
2009-10-28 20:52 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 21:03 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-28 21:06 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 21:35 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-28 21:46 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-28 22:36 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-29 8:21 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-29 16:34 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-29 19:06 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-27 20:16 ` [PATCH 3/8] SGI x86_64 UV: Limit the number of number of SRAT messages Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-10-27 20:23 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-27 20:33 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-10-23 23:37 ` [PATCH 4/8] SGI x86_64 UV: Limit the number of ACPI messages Mike Travis
2009-10-24 3:29 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2009-10-26 18:15 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 22:47 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-10-26 21:25 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-27 15:27 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-27 15:51 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2009-10-23 23:37 ` [PATCH 5/8] SGI x86_64 UV: Limit the number of firmware messages Mike Travis
2009-10-23 23:37 ` [PATCH 6/8] SGI x86_64 UV: Limit the number of microcode messages Mike Travis
2009-10-24 20:09 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2009-10-24 21:09 ` Tigran Aivazian
2009-10-24 22:45 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2009-10-25 16:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-25 17:11 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-10-25 17:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-26 18:33 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 18:29 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 18:29 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 20:11 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2009-10-27 15:21 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 18:25 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 19:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2009-10-30 19:40 ` [PATCH] x86_64: " Mike Travis
2009-10-26 18:24 ` [PATCH 6/8] SGI x86_64 UV: " Mike Travis
2009-10-26 18:18 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-26 7:05 ` Andi Kleen
2009-10-26 18:34 ` Mike Travis
2009-10-23 23:37 ` [PATCH 7/8] SGI x86_64 UV: Limit the number of scheduler debug messages Mike Travis
2009-10-23 23:37 ` [PATCH 8/8] SGI x86_64 UV: Limit the number of cpu is down messages Mike Travis
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=20091112222200.GA19109@redhat.com \
--to=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai@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
Powered by JetHome