On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 5:34 AM Valentin Schneider
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 24/09/21 20:51, Barry Song wrote:

quoted

 void update_siblings_masks(unsigned int cpuid)
 {
      struct cpu_topology *cpu_topo, *cpuid_topo = &cpu_topology[cpuid];

@@ -617,6 +622,11 @@ void update_siblings_masks(unsigned int cpuid)
              if (cpuid_topo->package_id != cpu_topo->package_id)
                      continue;

+             if (cpuid_topo->cluster_id == cpu_topo->cluster_id) {
+                     cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &cpuid_topo->cluster_sibling);
+                     cpumask_set_cpu(cpuid, &cpu_topo->cluster_sibling);
+             }
+

Hm so without cluster information (e.g. DT system), we have
->cluster_id=-1, we'll essentially copy the package mask into the cluster
mask.

The exposed cluster mask is still <= package mask which is sensible. Are we
fine with that, or do we need/want the mask to be empty in the -1 case? I'm
guessing userspace tools should check for either id!=-1 or if the exclusive
disjucntion of cluster vs package masks is non-empty.

Hi Valentin,
Yep, this is a very good question. I'd like change the code to:

diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
index 7cb31d959f33..fc0836f460fb 100644
--- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
+++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c

@@ -622,7 +622,8 @@ void update_siblings_masks(unsigned int cpuid)
                if (cpuid_topo->package_id != cpu_topo->package_id)
                        continue;

-               if (cpuid_topo->cluster_id == cpu_topo->cluster_id) {
+               if (cpuid_topo->cluster_id == cpu_topo->cluster_id &&
+                   cpuid_topo->cluster_id != -1) {
                        cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &cpuid_topo->cluster_sibling);
                        cpumask_set_cpu(cpuid, &cpu_topo->cluster_sibling);
                }