[PATCH v7 07/13] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI based firmware tables
From: Sudeep Holla <hidden>
Date: 2018-03-06 17:50:15
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-riscv, lkml
On 28/02/18 22:06, Jeremy Linton wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Call ACPI cache parsing routines from base cacheinfo code if ACPI is enable. Also stub out cache_setup_acpi() so that individual architectures can enable ACPI topology parsing. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <redacted> --- drivers/acpi/pptt.c | 1 + drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 14 ++++++++++---- include/linux/cacheinfo.h | 9 +++++++++ 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c index 883e4318c6cd..c98f94ebd272 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c@@ -343,6 +343,7 @@ static void update_cache_properties(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, { int valid_flags = 0; + this_leaf->fw_token = cpu_node;
Any reason why this can't part of 05/13 ?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
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 597aacb233fc..2880e2ab01f5 100644 --- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c +++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ 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 */@@ -214,6 +214,11 @@ 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);@@ -227,8 +232,8 @@ static int cache_shared_cpu_map_setup(unsigned int cpu) 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; + ret = cache_setup_acpi(cpu); + if (ret) return ret;@@ -279,7 +284,8 @@ static void cache_shared_cpu_map_remove(unsigned int cpu) cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &sib_leaf->shared_cpu_map); cpumask_clear_cpu(sibling, &this_leaf->shared_cpu_map); } - of_node_put(this_leaf->fw_token); + if (of_have_populated_dt()) + of_node_put(this_leaf->fw_token); } }diff --git a/include/linux/cacheinfo.h b/include/linux/cacheinfo.h index 0c6f658054d2..1446d3f053a2 100644 --- a/include/linux/cacheinfo.h +++ b/include/linux/cacheinfo.h@@ -97,6 +97,15 @@ int func(unsigned int cpu) \ struct cpu_cacheinfo *get_cpu_cacheinfo(unsigned int cpu); int init_cache_level(unsigned int cpu); int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu); +int cache_setup_acpi(unsigned int cpu); +int acpi_find_last_cache_level(unsigned int cpu); +#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI +int acpi_find_last_cache_level(unsigned int cpu)
The above 3 lines looks weird, can't it be:
#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
int acpi_find_last_cache_level(unsigned int cpu);
#else
int acpi_find_last_cache_level(unsigned int cpu)
{
/* ACPI kernels should be built with PPTT support */
return 0;
}
Also I think it should be CONFIG_ACPI_PPTT, otherwise it might cause
issue on platforms which define CONFIG_ACPI but CONFIG_ACPI_PPTT is not.
I can only relate this to the s390 error reported by kbuild robot.
--
Regards,
Sudeep