Re: [PATCH V6 0/7] ACPI: Support Generic Initiator proximity domains
flat view
From: Brice Goglin <hidden>
Date: 2019-12-20 21:40:23
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-mm, lkml
Le 18/12/2019 à 15:50, Jonathan Cameron a écrit :
On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 12:32:06 +0100 Brice Goglin [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Le 16/12/2019 à 16:38, Jonathan Cameron a écrit :quoted
Introduces a new type of NUMA node for cases where we want to represent the access characteristics of a non CPU initiator of memory requests, as these differ from all those for existing nodes containing CPUs and/or memory. These Generic Initiators are presented by the node access0 class in sysfs in the same way as a CPU. It seems likely that there will be usecases in which the best 'CPU' is desired and Generic Initiators should be ignored. The final few patches in this series introduced access1 which is a new performance class in the sysfs node description which presents only CPU to memory relationships. Test cases for this are described below.Hello Jonathan If I want to test this with a fake GI, what are the minimal set of changes I should put in my ACPI tables? Can I just specify a dummy GI in SRAT? What handle should I use there?Exactly that for a dummy GI. Also extend HMAT and SLIT for the extra proximity domain / initiator.
I couldn't get this to work (your patches on top of 5.5-rc2). I added the GI in SRAT, and extended HMAT and SLIT accordingly. I don't know if that's expected but I get an additional node in sysfs, with 0kB memory. However the HMAT table gets ignored because find_mem_target() fails in hmat_parse_proximity_domain(). The target should have been allocated in alloc_memory_target() which is called in srat_parse_mem_affinity(), but it seems to me that this function isn't called for GI nodes. Or should SRAT also contain a normal Memory node with same PM as the GI? Brice _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel