diff mbox series

[v4,2/3] riscv: cacheinfo: initialize cacheinfo's level and type from ACPI PPTT

Message ID 20240418034330.84721-2-cuiyunhui@bytedance.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Headers show
Series [v4,1/3] riscv: cacheinfo: remove the useless input parameter (node) of ci_leaf_init() | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
conchuod/vmtest-for-next-PR success PR summary
conchuod/patch-2-test-1 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/build_rv32_defconfig.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-2 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/build_rv64_clang_allmodconfig.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-3 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/build_rv64_gcc_allmodconfig.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-4 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/build_rv64_nommu_k210_defconfig.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-5 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/build_rv64_nommu_virt_defconfig.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-6 warning .github/scripts/patches/tests/checkpatch.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-7 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/dtb_warn_rv64.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-8 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/header_inline.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-9 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/kdoc.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-10 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/module_param.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-11 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/verify_fixes.sh
conchuod/patch-2-test-12 success .github/scripts/patches/tests/verify_signedoff.sh

Commit Message

Yunhui Cui April 18, 2024, 3:43 a.m. UTC
Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
(acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.

Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
---
 arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)

Comments

Sudeep Holla April 18, 2024, 8:41 a.m. UTC | #1
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:43:29AM +0800, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
> describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> 
> Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> index 30a6878287ad..e47a1e6bd3fe 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  #include <linux/cpu.h>
>  #include <linux/of.h>
>  #include <asm/cacheinfo.h>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
>  
>  static struct riscv_cacheinfo_ops *rv_cache_ops;
>  
> @@ -78,6 +79,27 @@ int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu)
>  	struct device_node *prev = NULL;
>  	int levels = 1, level = 1;
>  
> +	if (!acpi_disabled) {
> +		int ret, fw_levels, split_levels;
> +
> +		ret = acpi_get_cache_info(cpu, &fw_levels, &split_levels);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
> +
> +		BUG_ON((split_levels > fw_levels) ||
> +		       (split_levels + fw_levels > this_cpu_ci->num_leaves));
> +
> +		for (; level <= this_cpu_ci->num_levels; level++) {
> +			if (level <= split_levels) {
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_DATA, level);
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_INST, level);
> +			} else {
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> +			}
> +		}
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +

Much better, so my review still stands 
Yunhui Cui April 19, 2024, 6:27 a.m. UTC | #2
Hi palmer,

On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 4:42 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:43:29AM +0800, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> > Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> > and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
> > describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> > directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> > (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> > Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > index 30a6878287ad..e47a1e6bd3fe 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/cpu.h>
> >  #include <linux/of.h>
> >  #include <asm/cacheinfo.h>
> > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> >
> >  static struct riscv_cacheinfo_ops *rv_cache_ops;
> >
> > @@ -78,6 +79,27 @@ int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu)
> >       struct device_node *prev = NULL;
> >       int levels = 1, level = 1;
> >
> > +     if (!acpi_disabled) {
> > +             int ret, fw_levels, split_levels;
> > +
> > +             ret = acpi_get_cache_info(cpu, &fw_levels, &split_levels);
> > +             if (ret)
> > +                     return ret;
> > +
> > +             BUG_ON((split_levels > fw_levels) ||
> > +                    (split_levels + fw_levels > this_cpu_ci->num_leaves));
> > +
> > +             for (; level <= this_cpu_ci->num_levels; level++) {
> > +                     if (level <= split_levels) {
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_DATA, level);
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_INST, level);
> > +                     } else {
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> > +                     }
> > +             }
> > +             return 0;
> > +     }
> > +
>
> Much better, so my review still stands 
Jeremy Linton April 19, 2024, 3:28 p.m. UTC | #3
Hi,

On 4/17/24 22:43, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
> describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> 
> Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
> ---
>   arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> index 30a6878287ad..e47a1e6bd3fe 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>   #include <linux/cpu.h>
>   #include <linux/of.h>
>   #include <asm/cacheinfo.h>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
>   
>   static struct riscv_cacheinfo_ops *rv_cache_ops;
>   
> @@ -78,6 +79,27 @@ int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu)
>   	struct device_node *prev = NULL;
>   	int levels = 1, level = 1;
>   
> +	if (!acpi_disabled) {
> +		int ret, fw_levels, split_levels;
> +
> +		ret = acpi_get_cache_info(cpu, &fw_levels, &split_levels);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
> +
> +		BUG_ON((split_levels > fw_levels) ||
> +		       (split_levels + fw_levels > this_cpu_ci->num_leaves));
> +
> +		for (; level <= this_cpu_ci->num_levels; level++) {
> +			if (level <= split_levels) {
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_DATA, level);
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_INST, level);
> +			} else {
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> +			}
> +		}
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
>   	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
>   		ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
>   	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))

Yes, looks good.

Reviewed-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>



Thanks,
Yunhui Cui April 23, 2024, 11:03 a.m. UTC | #4
Hi Palmer,

On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 11:29 PM Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 4/17/24 22:43, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> > Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> > and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
> > describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> > directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> > (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> > Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > index 30a6878287ad..e47a1e6bd3fe 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> >   #include <linux/cpu.h>
> >   #include <linux/of.h>
> >   #include <asm/cacheinfo.h>
> > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> >
> >   static struct riscv_cacheinfo_ops *rv_cache_ops;
> >
> > @@ -78,6 +79,27 @@ int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu)
> >       struct device_node *prev = NULL;
> >       int levels = 1, level = 1;
> >
> > +     if (!acpi_disabled) {
> > +             int ret, fw_levels, split_levels;
> > +
> > +             ret = acpi_get_cache_info(cpu, &fw_levels, &split_levels);
> > +             if (ret)
> > +                     return ret;
> > +
> > +             BUG_ON((split_levels > fw_levels) ||
> > +                    (split_levels + fw_levels > this_cpu_ci->num_leaves));
> > +
> > +             for (; level <= this_cpu_ci->num_levels; level++) {
> > +                     if (level <= split_levels) {
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_DATA, level);
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_INST, level);
> > +                     } else {
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> > +                     }
> > +             }
> > +             return 0;
> > +     }
> > +
> >       if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
> >               ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> >       if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))
>
> Yes, looks good.
>
> Reviewed-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
>
>
>
> Thanks,

Could you help review this patchset? Thanks.

Thanks,
Yunhui
Yunhui Cui April 30, 2024, 3:16 a.m. UTC | #5
Hi Palmer,

Gentle ping...

On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 7:03 PM yunhui cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Palmer,
>
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 11:29 PM Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 4/17/24 22:43, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> > > Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> > > and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
> > > describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> > > directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> > > (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> > > Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
> > > ---
> > >   arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > > index 30a6878287ad..e47a1e6bd3fe 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> > >   #include <linux/cpu.h>
> > >   #include <linux/of.h>
> > >   #include <asm/cacheinfo.h>
> > > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> > >
> > >   static struct riscv_cacheinfo_ops *rv_cache_ops;
> > >
> > > @@ -78,6 +79,27 @@ int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu)
> > >       struct device_node *prev = NULL;
> > >       int levels = 1, level = 1;
> > >
> > > +     if (!acpi_disabled) {
> > > +             int ret, fw_levels, split_levels;
> > > +
> > > +             ret = acpi_get_cache_info(cpu, &fw_levels, &split_levels);
> > > +             if (ret)
> > > +                     return ret;
> > > +
> > > +             BUG_ON((split_levels > fw_levels) ||
> > > +                    (split_levels + fw_levels > this_cpu_ci->num_leaves));
> > > +
> > > +             for (; level <= this_cpu_ci->num_levels; level++) {
> > > +                     if (level <= split_levels) {
> > > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_DATA, level);
> > > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_INST, level);
> > > +                     } else {
> > > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> > > +                     }
> > > +             }
> > > +             return 0;
> > > +     }
> > > +
> > >       if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
> > >               ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> > >       if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))
> >
> > Yes, looks good.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
>
> Could you help review this patchset? Thanks.
>
> Thanks,
> Yunhui

Thanks,
Yunhui
Conor Dooley May 2, 2024, 4:37 p.m. UTC | #6
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:43:29AM +0800, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
> describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> 
> Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
: Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>

I'm not an ACPI head, so whether or not the table is valid on RISC-V or
w/e I do not know, but the code here looks sane to me, so
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

Cheers,
Conor.
Yunhui Cui May 8, 2024, 11:19 a.m. UTC | #7
Hi Palmer,

Gentle ping...

On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 12:37 AM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:43:29AM +0800, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> > Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> > and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
> > describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> > directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> > (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> > Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> : Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
>
> I'm not an ACPI head, so whether or not the table is valid on RISC-V or
> w/e I do not know, but the code here looks sane to me, so

> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>
> Cheers,
> Conor.

Thanks,
Yunhui
Palmer Dabbelt May 8, 2024, 2:53 p.m. UTC | #8
On Wed, 08 May 2024 04:19:01 PDT (-0700), cuiyunhui@bytedance.com wrote:
> Hi Palmer,
>
> Gentle ping...

+Sunil, as he's the ACPI/RISC-V maintainer and I generally wait for his 
review on this stuff.

>
> On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 12:37 AM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:43:29AM +0800, Yunhui Cui wrote:
>> > Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
>> > and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
>> > describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
>> > directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
>> > (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
>> >
>> > Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
>> > Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
>> : Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
>>
>> I'm not an ACPI head, so whether or not the table is valid on RISC-V or
>> w/e I do not know, but the code here looks sane to me, so
>
>> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Conor.
>
> Thanks,
> Yunhui
Sunil V L May 9, 2024, 4:09 a.m. UTC | #9
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:43:29AM +0800, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that

NIT: Typo RISC-V

> describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> 
> Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> index 30a6878287ad..e47a1e6bd3fe 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  #include <linux/cpu.h>
>  #include <linux/of.h>
>  #include <asm/cacheinfo.h>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
>  
Can this be added in the order? Like, include acpi.h prior to cpu.h?

>  static struct riscv_cacheinfo_ops *rv_cache_ops;
>  
> @@ -78,6 +79,27 @@ int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu)
>  	struct device_node *prev = NULL;
>  	int levels = 1, level = 1;
>  
> +	if (!acpi_disabled) {
> +		int ret, fw_levels, split_levels;
> +
> +		ret = acpi_get_cache_info(cpu, &fw_levels, &split_levels);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
> +
> +		BUG_ON((split_levels > fw_levels) ||
> +		       (split_levels + fw_levels > this_cpu_ci->num_leaves));
> +
> +		for (; level <= this_cpu_ci->num_levels; level++) {
> +			if (level <= split_levels) {
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_DATA, level);
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_INST, level);
> +			} else {
> +				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> +			}
> +		}
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
Other than above nits, it looks good to me. Thanks for the patch!

Reviewed-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
Yunhui Cui May 9, 2024, 6:33 a.m. UTC | #10
Hi Sunil,

On Thu, May 9, 2024 at 12:09 PM Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:43:29AM +0800, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> > Before cacheinfo can be built correctly, we need to initialize level
> > and type. Since RSIC-V currently does not have a register group that
>
> NIT: Typo RISC-V
Okay, I'll update it in v5.

>
> > describes cache-related attributes like ARM64, we cannot obtain them
> > directly, so now we obtain cache leaves from the ACPI PPTT table
> > (acpi_get_cache_info()) and set the cache type through split_levels.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> > Suggested-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > index 30a6878287ad..e47a1e6bd3fe 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
> > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/cpu.h>
> >  #include <linux/of.h>
> >  #include <asm/cacheinfo.h>
> > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> >
> Can this be added in the order? Like, include acpi.h prior to cpu.h?
Okay, I'll update it in v5.

>
> >  static struct riscv_cacheinfo_ops *rv_cache_ops;
> >
> > @@ -78,6 +79,27 @@ int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu)
> >       struct device_node *prev = NULL;
> >       int levels = 1, level = 1;
> >
> > +     if (!acpi_disabled) {
> > +             int ret, fw_levels, split_levels;
> > +
> > +             ret = acpi_get_cache_info(cpu, &fw_levels, &split_levels);
> > +             if (ret)
> > +                     return ret;
> > +
> > +             BUG_ON((split_levels > fw_levels) ||
> > +                    (split_levels + fw_levels > this_cpu_ci->num_leaves));
> > +
> > +             for (; level <= this_cpu_ci->num_levels; level++) {
> > +                     if (level <= split_levels) {
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_DATA, level);
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_INST, level);
> > +                     } else {
> > +                             ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
> > +                     }
> > +             }
> > +             return 0;
> > +     }
> > +
> Other than above nits, it looks good to me. Thanks for the patch!
>
> Reviewed-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>


Thanks,
Yunhui
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
index 30a6878287ad..e47a1e6bd3fe 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cacheinfo.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ 
 #include <linux/cpu.h>
 #include <linux/of.h>
 #include <asm/cacheinfo.h>
+#include <linux/acpi.h>
 
 static struct riscv_cacheinfo_ops *rv_cache_ops;
 
@@ -78,6 +79,27 @@  int populate_cache_leaves(unsigned int cpu)
 	struct device_node *prev = NULL;
 	int levels = 1, level = 1;
 
+	if (!acpi_disabled) {
+		int ret, fw_levels, split_levels;
+
+		ret = acpi_get_cache_info(cpu, &fw_levels, &split_levels);
+		if (ret)
+			return ret;
+
+		BUG_ON((split_levels > fw_levels) ||
+		       (split_levels + fw_levels > this_cpu_ci->num_leaves));
+
+		for (; level <= this_cpu_ci->num_levels; level++) {
+			if (level <= split_levels) {
+				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_DATA, level);
+				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_INST, level);
+			} else {
+				ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
+			}
+		}
+		return 0;
+	}
+
 	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "cache-size"))
 		ci_leaf_init(this_leaf++, CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level);
 	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "i-cache-size"))