Re: [GIT PULL] Fix RISC-V's arch-topology reporting

[Palmer Dabbelt]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 14:10:54 PDT (-0700), Conor.Dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 18/08/2022 22:03, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Aug 2022 15:14:55 PDT (-0700), Conor.Dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Hey Will/Palmer/Sudeep,
> > >
> > > Catalin suggested [0] dropping the CC: stable for the arm64 patch and
> > > instead making it a specific prereq of the RISC-V patch & making a PR,
> > > so here we are.. I was still up when -rc1 came out so pushed it last
> > > night to get the test coverage, but LKP seems to not have reported a
> > > build success since early on the 13th so not holding my horses! I built
> > > it again for both ARMs and RISC-V myself.
> > >
> > > I tagged it tonight, so it's on conor/linux.git as riscv-topo-on-6.0-rc1
> > > with the prereq specified.
> > >
> > > Not sure if you want to merge this too Sudeep or if that's up to Greg?
> >
> > It's a little bit vague what you're asking for here, so I'm just
> > going to kind of guessing here but this on riscv/for-next.  I'm not
> > sure if you were looking for me to just merge the arch/riscv bits or
> > if this should be on fixes (just looking at the patch makes it look
> > like it should be), but I don't want to send up some arm64 code to
> > fixes without it being pretty explicit that I should do so
>
> Ahh sorry, I completely forgot to mention that Will said "for 5.21" in
> his response to my original patchset. for-next sounds fine to me - all
> in-tree devicetrees had the optional properties added to them that solve
> the issue - and they were AUTOSEL'ed too from what I can see.

OK, sounds like we're good then.

> Thanks & sorry!
> Conor.
>
> > Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> # arch/riscv bits, for 6.0-rc
> >
> > in case someone else wants to send it up before I get back to this,
> > I'm fine either way.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Conor.
> > >
> > > 0 - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/Ytac7G1zlq6WW4jt@xxxxxxx/
> > >
> > > The following changes since commit 568035b01cfb107af8d2e4bd2fb9aea22cf5b868:
> > >
> > >   Linux 6.0-rc1 (2022-08-14 15:50:18 -0700)
> > >
> > > are available in the Git repository at:
> > >
> > >   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/conor/linux.git/ tags/riscv-topo-on-6.0-rc1
> > >
> > > for you to fetch changes up to fbd92809997a391f28075f1c8b5ee314c225557c:
> > >
> > >   riscv: topology: fix default topology reporting (2022-08-15 22:07:34 +0100)
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Fix RISC-V's topology reporting
> > >
> > > The goal here is the fix the incorrectly reported arch topology on
> > > RISC-V which seems to have been broken since it was added.
> > > cpu, package and thread IDs are all currently reported as -1, so tools
> > > like lstopo think systems have multiple threads on the same core when
> > > this is not true:
> > > https://github.com/open-mpi/hwloc/issues/536
> > >
> > > arm64's topology code basically applies to RISC-V too, so it has been
> > > made generic along with the removal of MPIDR related code, which
> > > appears to be redudant code since '3102bc0e6ac7 ("arm64: topology: Stop
> > > using MPIDR for topology information")' replaced the code that actually
> > > interacted with MPIDR with default values.
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Conor Dooley (2):
> > >       arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code
> > >       riscv: topology: fix default topology reporting
> > >
> > >  arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 40 ----------------------------------------
> > >  arch/riscv/Kconfig           |  2 +-
> > >  arch/riscv/kernel/smpboot.c  |  3 ++-
> > >  drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> > >  4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-riscv mailing list
> > linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv