[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140502200433.GX3245@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 13:04:33 -0700
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Zi Shen Lim <zlim@...adcom.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] arm64: topology: add MPIDR-based detection
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 04:36:13PM -0700, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
This looks good to me, modulo a couple of really tiny nitpicks.
Reviwed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...aro.org>
I'm just doing some brief testing now, I'll repost my series with this
and Lorenzo's changes included shortly assuming no issues.
> if (cpuid_topo->cluster_id == -1) {
> - /*
> - * DT does not contain topology information for this cpu.
> - */
> + /* No topology information for this cpu ?! */
> pr_debug("CPU%u: No topology information configured\n", cpuid);
> return;
> }
Now that we have MPIDR support (well, will with this patch) this should
probably be raised to a pr_err() since we've got ourselves confused
somehow if it ever happens - we should always be able to get topology
from MPIDR. I'll tweak this when I repost.
> + pr_debug("CPU%u: cluster %d core %d thread %d mpidr %llx\n",
> + cpuid, cpuid_topo->cluster_id, cpuid_topo->core_id,
> + cpuid_topo->thread_id, mpidr);
I do wonder if we should print this either unconditionally or not at
all (rather than only if using MPIDR), I know Catalin and/or Lorenzo
weren't keen on noise but it is just at debug level and it's nice and
easy to refer to.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists