[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YwUUEzULS1ha1rqY@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 18:53:23 +0100
From: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>
To: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...wei.com>
Cc: yangyicong@...ilicon.com, sudeep.holla@....com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org, 21cnbao@...il.com,
jonathan.cameron@...wei.com, linuxarm@...wei.com,
prime.zeng@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch_topology: Make cluster topology span at least SMT
CPUs
Hi,
On Tuesday 23 Aug 2022 at 21:05:47 (+0800), Yicong Yang wrote:
> On 2022/8/23 16:06, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> > Hi Yicong,
> >
> > On Tuesday 23 Aug 2022 at 15:30:44 (+0800), Yicong Yang wrote:
> >> From: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>
> >>
> >> Currently cpu_clustergroup_mask() will return CPU mask if cluster span
> >> more or the same CPUs as cpu_coregroup_mask(). This will result topology
> >> borken on non-Cluster SMT machines.
> >
> > Might be worth adding here:.. "when building with CONFIG_SCHED_CLUSTER=y"
> >
>
> will add this qualifier. thanks.
>
> >>
> >
> > I thought I had covered this case, but I think I had considered LLC
> > spanning more than one core (tested on TX2 as well).
> >
> > So you'd only hit this if LLC and cluster level span the same cores (a
> > single core in this case, for non-cluster), in the presence of SMT.
> >
>
> Not sure I understand it correctly but in the below case I think the LLC may span
> the same core with socket?
Ah, I've jumped to conclusions based on the "non-cluster" mention. Does
"non-cluster" just mean that there's no intermediary "cluster" grouping of
CPUs between core and LLC? How does the PPTT table look like, by the
way?
Thanks,
Ionela.
>
> > Reviewed-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Ionela.
> >
> >> Test with:
> >> qemu-system-aarch64 -enable-kvm -machine virt \
> >> -net none \
> >> -cpu host \
> >> -bios ./QEMU_EFI.fd \
> >> -m 2G \
> >> -smp 48,sockets=2,cores=12,threads=2 \
> >> -kernel $Image \
> >> -initrd $Rootfs \
> >> -nographic
> >> -append "rdinit=init console=ttyAMA0 sched_verbose loglevel=8"
> >>
> >> We'll get below error:
> >> [ 3.084568] BUG: arch topology borken
> >> [ 3.084570] the SMT domain not a subset of the CLS domain
> >>
> >> Since cluster is a level higher than SMT, fix this by making cluster
> >> spans at least SMT CPUs.
> >>
> >> Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> >> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> >> Cc: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>
> >> Fixes: bfcc4397435d ("arch_topology: Limit span of cpu_clustergroup_mask()")
> >> Signed-off-by: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> >> index 0424b59b695e..0056a1273275 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> >> @@ -724,7 +724,7 @@ const struct cpumask *cpu_clustergroup_mask(int cpu)
> >> */
> >> if (cpumask_subset(cpu_coregroup_mask(cpu),
> >> &cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_sibling))
> >> - return get_cpu_mask(cpu);
> >> + return cpu_smt_mask(cpu);
> >>
> >> return &cpu_topology[cpu].cluster_sibling;
> >> }
> >> --
> >> 2.24.0
> >>
> >
> > .
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists