Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1432853 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-28 13:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-06-28 16:30 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH v6] arm64: cpuinfo: Expose MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 to sysfs Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> - 2016-06-28 13:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v6] arm64: cpuinfo: Expose MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 to sysfs Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> - 2016-06-28 16:30 +0200
| From | Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-28 13:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v6] arm64: cpuinfo: Expose MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 to sysfs |
| Message-ID | <rOZ3X-6bg-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:12:36PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> From: Steve Capper <steve.capper@linaro.org>
>
> It can be useful for JIT software to be aware of MIDR_EL1 and
> REVIDR_EL1 to ascertain the presence of any core errata that could
> affect code generation.
>
> This patch exposes these registers through sysfs:
>
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu$ID/identification/midr
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu$ID/identification/revidr
>
> where $ID is the cpu number. For big.LITTLE systems, one can have a
> mixture of cores (e.g. Cortex A53 and Cortex A57), thus all CPUs need
> to be enumerated.
>
> If the kernel does not have valid information to populate these entries
> with, an empty string is returned to userspace.
>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Capper <steve.capper@linaro.org>
> [ ABI documentation updates, hotplug notifiers ]
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Looks good to me, but one minor comment below.
> +static struct attribute_group cpuregs_attr_group = {
> + .attrs = cpuregs_attrs,
> + .name = "identification"
> +};
This makes sense because MIDR/REVIDR belong to the "Identification"
functional group of registers, however I wonder if we should put this
under a directory called "regs" or similar, so that we don't have a
confusing top-level directory where "identification" lives alongside
things like "hotplug" and "cpuidle".
Either way:
Reviewed-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Will
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-28 16:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rP2bv-8gz-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1432853 |
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:12:36PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > +static struct attribute_group cpuregs_attr_group = {
> > + .attrs = cpuregs_attrs,
> > + .name = "identification"
> > +};
>
> This makes sense because MIDR/REVIDR belong to the "Identification"
> functional group of registers, however I wonder if we should put this
> under a directory called "regs" or similar, so that we don't have a
> confusing top-level directory where "identification" lives alongside
> things like "hotplug" and "cpuidle".
IMO, there are too many subdirectories and I don't think we would expose
any other registers than the ID ones.
--
Catalin
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web