From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB34C43441 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:25:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E8072075B for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:25:10 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8E8072075B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729537AbeKTWyB (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:54:01 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:48072 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728375AbeKTWyA (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:54:00 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 895E080D; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 04:25:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from e107155-lin (e107155-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.42]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 996853F5B7; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 04:25:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:24:58 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Atish Patra Cc: Rob Herring , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "palmer@sifive.com" , "anup@brainfault.org" , Damien Le Moal , "mick@ics.forth.gr" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "zong@andestech.com" , "alankao@andestech.com" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Documentation: DT: arm: add support for sockets defining package boundaries Message-ID: <20181120122458.GA13255@e107155-lin> References: <20181107171344.983-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <5bea0ecf.1c69fb81.7820a.2052@mx.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 05:18:42PM -0800, Atish Patra wrote: > On 11/12/18 3:37 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 05:13:44PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > The current ARM DT topology description provides the operating system > > > with a topological view of the system that is based on leaf nodes > > > representing either cores or threads (in an SMT system) and a > > > hierarchical set of cluster nodes that creates a hierarchical topology > > > view of how those cores and threads are grouped. > > > > > > However this hierarchical representation of clusters does not allow to > > > describe what topology level actually represents the physical package or > > > the socket boundary, which is a key piece of information to be used by > > > an operating system to optimize resource allocation and scheduling. > > > > > > Lets add a new "socket" node type in the cpu-map node to describe the > > > same. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla > > > --- > > > .../devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt | 52 ++++++++++++++----- > > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > > > > > (Note patch generated with -b option to avoid 60+ of whitespace changes) > > > > > > Hi Rob, > > > > > > You had expressed your interest to generalise the CPU topology bindings > > > accross multiple architectures. Do you want to move to the generic > > > bindings before adding this $subject socket support or is it OK to > > > finalise on this and then move the majority(based on the agreement) > > > to generic binding. > > > > Doesn't really matter to me as long as Risc-V folks are in agreement. > > > > Otherwise, this looks fine to me. > > > > Rob > > > > > I can apply this patch in my unify topology series and resend everything > together as one series. Thanks for that. You can drop RFC when reposting. Remember to use -b for ignoring space changes on this patch along with -M for renames in your original patch series. -- Regards, Sudeep