linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 07/12] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI based firmware tables

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180122155022.GA7714@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:50:22 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>
Cc:     linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        sudeep.holla@....com, hanjun.guo@...aro.org,
        lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, rjw@...ysocki.net, will.deacon@....com,
        catalin.marinas@....com, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, jhugo@...eaurora.org,
        wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com, Jonathan.Zhang@...ium.com,
        ahs3@...hat.com, Jayachandran.Nair@...ium.com,
        austinwc@...eaurora.org, lenb@...nel.org, vkilari@...eaurora.org,
        morten.rasmussen@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 07/12] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI
 based firmware tables

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 06:59:15PM -0600, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> Add a entry to to struct cacheinfo to maintain a reference to the PPTT
> node which can be used to match identical caches across cores. Also
> stub out cache_setup_acpi() so that individual architectures can
> enable ACPI topology parsing.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/pptt.c       |  1 +
>  drivers/base/cacheinfo.c  | 20 +++++++++++++-------
>  include/linux/cacheinfo.h |  9 +++++++++
>  3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
> index 2c4b3ed862a8..4f5ab19c3a08 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
> @@ -329,6 +329,7 @@ static void update_cache_properties(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
>  {
>  	int valid_flags = 0;
>  
> +	this_leaf->fw_unique = cpu_node;
>  	if (found_cache->flags & ACPI_PPTT_SIZE_PROPERTY_VALID) {
>  		this_leaf->size = found_cache->size;
>  		valid_flags++;
> diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
> index 217aa90fb036..ee51e33cc37c 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
> @@ -208,16 +208,16 @@ static int cache_setup_of_node(unsigned int cpu)
>  
>  	if (index != cache_leaves(cpu)) /* not all OF nodes populated */
>  		return -ENOENT;
> -
>  	return 0;
>  }
> +

Whitespace changes not needed for this patch :(


>  #else
>  static inline int cache_setup_of_node(unsigned int cpu) { return 0; }
>  static inline bool cache_leaves_are_shared(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
>  					   struct cacheinfo *sib_leaf)
>  {
>  	/*
> -	 * For non-DT systems, assume unique level 1 cache, system-wide
> +	 * For non-DT/ACPI systems, assume unique level 1 caches, system-wide
>  	 * shared caches for all other levels. This will be used only if
>  	 * arch specific code has not populated shared_cpu_map
>  	 */
> @@ -225,6 +225,11 @@ static inline bool cache_leaves_are_shared(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
>  }
>  #endif
>  
> +int __weak cache_setup_acpi(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +}
> +
>  static int cache_shared_cpu_map_setup(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
>  	struct cpu_cacheinfo *this_cpu_ci = get_cpu_cacheinfo(cpu);
> @@ -235,11 +240,11 @@ static int cache_shared_cpu_map_setup(unsigned int cpu)
>  	if (this_cpu_ci->cpu_map_populated)
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	if (of_have_populated_dt())
> +	if (!acpi_disabled)
> +		ret = cache_setup_acpi(cpu);

Why does acpi go first?  :)

> +	else if (of_have_populated_dt())
>  		ret = cache_setup_of_node(cpu);
> -	else if (!acpi_disabled)
> -		/* No cache property/hierarchy support yet in ACPI */
> -		ret = -ENOTSUPP;
> +
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
>  
> +int acpi_find_last_cache_level(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +	/*ACPI kernels should be built with PPTT support*/

Here are some extra ' ' characters, you need them...

thanks,

greg k-h