[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <873a80f0-e704-dd7e-4db9-b159b23847fc@wdc.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 19:18:36 -0700
From: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
To: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Otto Sabart <ottosabart@...erm.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Richard Fontana <rfontana@...hat.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/7] Documentation: DT: arm: add support for sockets
defining package boundaries
On 6/26/19 5:31 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> Hi Sudeep, Atish,
>
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, Atish Patra wrote:
>
>> From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>>
>> 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 <sudeep.holla@....com>
>> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
>
> This one doesn't apply cleanly here on top of v5.2-rc2, Linus's master
> branch, and next-20190626. The reject file is below. Am I missing
> a patch?
>
That's weird. I could apply the patch from any git tree (github or
git.kernel.org) but not from mail or patchworks.
git log doesn't show any recent modifications of that file. I am trying
to figure out what's wrong.
>
> - Paul
>
> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> +++ Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
> @@ -185,13 +206,15 @@ Bindings for cluster/cpu/thread nodes are defined as follows:
> 4 - Example dts
> ===========================================
>
> -Example 1 (ARM 64-bit, 16-cpu system, two clusters of clusters):
> +Example 1 (ARM 64-bit, 16-cpu system, two clusters of clusters in a single
> +physical socket):
>
> cpus {
> #size-cells = <0>;
> #address-cells = <2>;
>
> cpu-map {
> + socket0 {
> cluster0 {
> cluster0 {
> core0 {
>
--
Regards,
Atish
Powered by blists - more mailing lists