| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <a94ab8ed-e8e7-b239-d9f1-498f6f9348e1@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:34:27 -0800
From: Bo Yan <byan@...dia.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
CC: <jonathanh@...dia.com>, <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
<mark.rutland@....com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: tegra: add topology data for Tegra194 cpu
To make this simpler, I think it's best to isolate the cache information
in its own patch. So I will amend this patch to include topology
information only.
On 1/31/19 3:29 PM, Bo Yan wrote:
>
> On 1/31/19 2:25 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:35:54AM -0800, Bo Yan wrote:
>>> The xavier CPU architecture includes 8 CPU cores organized in
>>> 4 clusters. Add cpu-map data for topology initialization, add
>>> cache data for cache node creation in sysfs.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bo Yan <byan@...dia.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi | 148
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> 1 file changed, 140 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi
>>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi
>>> index 6dfa1ca..7c2a1fb 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi
>>> @@ -870,63 +870,195 @@
>>> #address-cells = <1>;
>>> #size-cells = <0>;
>
>> These don't seem to be well-defined. They are mentioned in a very weird
>> locations (Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt) but there
>> seem to be examples and other device tree files that use them so maybe
>> those are all valid. It might be worth mentioning these in other places
>> where people can more easily find them.
>
> It might be logical to place a reference to this document
> (booting-without-of.txt) in architecture specific documents, for
> example, arm/cpus.txt. I see the need for improved documentation, but
> this probably should be best done in a separate change.
>>
>> According to the above document, {i,d}-cache-line-size are deprecated in
>> favour of {i,d}-cache-block-size.
>
> Mostly, this seems to be derived from the oddity of PowerPC, which might
> have different cache-line-size and cache-block-size. I don't know if
> there are other examples? It looks like the {i,d}-cache-line-size are
> being used in dts files for almost all architectures, the only exception
> is arch/sh/boot/dts/j2_mimas_v2.dts. On ARM and ARM64, cache-line-size
> is the same as cache-block-size. So I am wondering whether the
> booting-without-of.txt should be fixed instead? just to keep it
> consistent among dts files, especially in arm64.
>
>>
>> I also don't see any mention of {i,d}-cache_sets in the device tree
>> bindings, though riscv/cpus.txt mentions {i,d}-cache-sets (note the
>> hyphen instead of underscore) in the examples. arm/l2c2x0.txt and
>> arm/uniphier/cache-unifier.txt describe cache-sets, though that's
>> slightly different.
>>
>> Might make sense to document all these in more standard places. Maybe
>> adding them to arm/cpus.txt. For consistency with other properties, I
>> think there should be called {i,d}-cache-sets like for RISC-V.
>>
>>> + l2-cache = <&l2_0>;
>>
>> This seems to be called next-level-cache everywhere else, though it's
>> only formally described in arm/uniphier/cache-uniphier.txt. So might
>> also make sense to add this to arm/cpus.txt.
>
> the improved documentation is certainly desired, I agree.
>>
>>> };
>>> - cpu@1 {
>>> + cl0_1: cpu@1 {
>>> compatible = "nvidia,tegra194-carmel", "arm,armv8";
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> reg = <0x10001>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> + i-cache-size = <131072>;
>>> + i-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + i-cache-sets = <512>;
>>> + d-cache-size = <65536>;
>>> + d-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + d-cache_sets = <256>;
>>> + l2-cache = <&l2_0>;
>>> };
>>> - cpu@2 {
>>> + cl1_0: cpu@2 {
>>> compatible = "nvidia,tegra194-carmel", "arm,armv8";
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> reg = <0x100>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> + i-cache-size = <131072>;
>>> + i-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + i-cache-sets = <512>;
>>> + d-cache-size = <65536>;
>>> + d-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + d-cache_sets = <256>;
>>> + l2-cache = <&l2_1>;
>>> };
>>> - cpu@3 {
>>> + cl1_1: cpu@3 {
>>> compatible = "nvidia,tegra194-carmel", "arm,armv8";
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> reg = <0x101>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> + i-cache-size = <131072>;
>>> + i-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + i-cache-sets = <512>;
>>> + d-cache-size = <65536>;
>>> + d-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + d-cache_sets = <256>;
>>> + l2-cache = <&l2_1>;
>>> };
>>> - cpu@4 {
>>> + cl2_0: cpu@4 {
>>> compatible = "nvidia,tegra194-carmel", "arm,armv8";
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> reg = <0x200>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> + i-cache-size = <131072>;
>>> + i-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + i-cache-sets = <512>;
>>> + d-cache-size = <65536>;
>>> + d-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + d-cache_sets = <256>;
>>> + l2-cache = <&l2_2>;
>>> };
>>> - cpu@5 {
>>> + cl2_1: cpu@5 {
>>> compatible = "nvidia,tegra194-carmel", "arm,armv8";
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> reg = <0x201>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> + i-cache-size = <131072>;
>>> + i-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + i-cache-sets = <512>;
>>> + d-cache-size = <65536>;
>>> + d-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + d-cache_sets = <256>;
>>> + l2-cache = <&l2_2>;
>>> };
>>> - cpu@6 {
>>> + cl3_0: cpu@6 {
>>> compatible = "nvidia,tegra194-carmel", "arm,armv8";
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> reg = <0x10300>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> + i-cache-size = <131072>;
>>> + i-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + i-cache-sets = <512>;
>>> + d-cache-size = <65536>;
>>> + d-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + d-cache_sets = <256>;
>>> + l2-cache = <&l2_3>;
>>> };
>>> - cpu@7 {
>>> + cl3_1: cpu@7 {
>>> compatible = "nvidia,tegra194-carmel", "arm,armv8";
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> reg = <0x10301>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> + i-cache-size = <131072>;
>>> + i-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + i-cache-sets = <512>;
>>> + d-cache-size = <65536>;
>>> + d-cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + d-cache_sets = <256>;
>>> + l2-cache = <&l2_3>;
>>> };
>>> };
>>> + l2_0: l2-cache0 {
>>> + cache-size = <2097152>;
>>> + cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + cache-sets = <2048>;
>>> + next-level-cache = <&l3>;
>>> + };
>>
>> Does this need a compatible string? Also, are there controllers behind
>> these caches? I'm just wondering if these also need reg properties and
>> unit-addresses.
>
> No need for compatible string. No reg properties and addresses. These
> will be parsed by drivers/of/base.c and drivers/base/cacheinfo.c, they
> are generic.
>>
>> arm/l2c2x0.txt and arm/uniphier/cache-uniphier.txt describe an
>> additional property that you don't specify here: cache-level. This
>> sounds useful to have so that we don't have to guess the cache level
>> from the name, which may or may not work depending on what people name
>> the nodes.
>
> the cache level property is implied in device tree hierarchy, so after
> system boots up, I can find cache level in related sysfs nodes:
>
> [root@...rm cache]# cat index*/level
> 1
> 1
> 2
> 3
>
>
>>
>> Also, similar to the L1 cache, cache-block-size is preferred over
>> cache-line-size.
>>
>>> + l3: l3-cache {
>>> + cache-size = <4194304>;
>>> + cache-line-size = <64>;
>>> + cache-sets = <4096>;
>>> + };
>>
>> The same comments apply as for the L2 caches.
>>
>> Thierry
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists