lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ACPI/HMAT: Fix the parsing of Cache Associativity and Write Policy
From
Date
On 12/10/2019 4:27 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 9:19 AM Tao Xu <tao3.xu@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/10/2019 4:06 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 2:04 AM Tao Xu <tao3.xu@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 12/9/2019 6:01 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 8:03 AM Tao Xu <tao3.xu@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In chapter 5.2.27.5, Table 5-147: Field "Cache Attributes" of
>>>>>> ACPI 6.3 spec: 0 is "None", 1 is "Direct Mapped", 2 is "Complex Cache
>>>>>> Indexing" for Cache Associativity; 0 is "None", 1 is "Write Back",
>>>>>> 2 is "Write Through" for Write Policy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, I'm not sure what the connection between the above statement,
>>>>> which is correct AFAICS, and the changes made by the patch is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that the *_OTHER symbol names are confusing or something deeper?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Because in include/acpi/actbl1.h:
>>>>
>>>> #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_NONE (0)
>>>>
>>>> ACPI_HMAT_CA_NONE is 0, but in include/linux/node.h:
>>>>
>>>> enum cache_indexing {
>>>> NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP,
>>>> NODE_CACHE_INDEXED,
>>>> NODE_CACHE_OTHER,
>>>> };
>>>> NODE_CACHE_OTHER is 2, and for otner enum:
>>>>
>>>> case ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED:
>>>> tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP;
>>>> break;
>>>> case ACPI_HMAT_CA_COMPLEX_CACHE_INDEXING:
>>>> tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_INDEXED;
>>>> break;
>>>> in include/acpi/actbl1.h:
>>>>
>>>> #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED (1)
>>>> #define ACPI_HMAT_CA_COMPLEX_CACHE_INDEXING (2)
>>>>
>>>> but in include/linux/node.h:
>>>>
>>>> NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP is 0, NODE_CACHE_INDEXED is 1. This is incorrect.
>>>
>>> Why is it incorrect?
>>
>> Sorry I paste the wrong pre-define.
>>
>> This is the incorrect line:
>>
>> case ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED:
>> tcache->cache_attrs.indexing = NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP;
>>
>> ACPI_HMAT_CA_DIRECT_MAPPED is 1, NODE_CACHE_DIRECT_MAP is 0. That means
>> if HMAT table input 1 for cache_attrs.indexing, kernel store 0 in
>> cache_attrs.indexing. But in ACPI 6.3, 0 means "None". So for the whole
>> switch codes:
>
> This is a mapping between the ACPI-defined values and the generic ones
> defined in the kernel. There is not rule I know of by which they must
> be the same numbers. Or is there such a rule which I'm missing?
>
> As long as cache_attrs.indexing is used consistently going forward,
> the difference between the ACPI-defined numbers and its values
> shouldn't matter, should it?
>
Yes, it will not influence the ACPI HMAT tables. Only influence is the
sysfs, as in
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/admin-guide/mm/numaperf.html:

# tree sys/devices/system/node/node0/memory_side_cache/
/sys/devices/system/node/node0/memory_side_cache/
|-- index1
| |-- indexing
| |-- line_size
| |-- size
| `-- write_policy

indexing is parsed in this file, so it can be read by user-space.
Although now there is no user-space tool use this information to do some
thing. But I am wondering if it is used in the future, someone use it to
show the memory side cache information to user or use it to do
performance turning.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-10 14:19    [W:0.046 / U:5.440 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site