-----Original Message-----
From: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gond...@arm.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 5:03 AM
To: Jeff Brasen <jbra...@nvidia.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io
Cc: sami.muja...@arm.com; alexei.fedo...@arm.com;
quic_llind...@quicinc.com; ardb+tianoc...@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DynamicTablesPkg: Allow multiple top level physical
nodes
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
Hello Jeff,
I think it's ok to make this the generic case and remove the Pcd to enable it.
Cf ACPI 6.5, 5.2.30.1 Processor hierarchy node structure (Type 0):
"Multiple trees may be described, covering for example multiple packages.
For the root of a tree, the parent pointer should be 0."
and
"Each valid processor must belong to exactly one package. That is, the leaf
must itself be a physical package or have an ancestor marked as a physical
package."
so this original comment is incorrect:
"""
// It is assumed that there is one unique CM_ARM_PROC_HIERARCHY_INFO
// structure with no ParentToken and the
EFI_ACPI_6_3_PPTT_PACKAGE_PHYSICAL
// flag set. All other CM_ARM_PROC_HIERARCHY_INFO are non-physical and
// have a ParentToken.
"""
On 2/1/23 17:42, Jeff Brasen wrote:
In SSDT CPU topology generator allow for multiple top level physical
nodes as would be seen with a multi-socket system. This will be auto
detected if there are more then one physical device and there is a new
PCD to enable forcing of a top level processor container to allow for
consistency for systems that can be either single or multi socket.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Brasen <jbra...@nvidia.com>
---
DynamicTablesPkg/DynamicTablesPkg.dec | 3 +
.../SsdtCpuTopologyGenerator.c | 66 ++++++++++---------
.../SsdtCpuTopologyLibArm.inf | 4 ++
3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
diff --git a/DynamicTablesPkg/DynamicTablesPkg.dec
b/DynamicTablesPkg/DynamicTablesPkg.dec
index adc2e67cbf..a061b70322 100644
--- a/DynamicTablesPkg/DynamicTablesPkg.dec
+++ b/DynamicTablesPkg/DynamicTablesPkg.dec
@@ -63,5 +63,8 @@
# Use PCI segment numbers as UID
gEdkiiDynamicTablesPkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdPciUseSegmentAsUid|FALSE|B
OOLE
AN|0x40000009
+ # Force top level container for single socket devices
+
gEdkiiDynamicTablesPkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdForceTopLevelProcessorContai
+ ner|FALSE|BOOLEAN|0x4000000A
+
[Guids]
gEdkiiDynamicTablesPkgTokenSpaceGuid = { 0xab226e66, 0x31d8,
0x4613, { 0x87, 0x9d, 0xd2, 0xfa, 0xb6, 0x10, 0x26, 0x3c } } diff
--git
a/DynamicTablesPkg/Library/Acpi/Arm/AcpiSsdtCpuTopologyLibArm/SsdtCp
uT
opologyGenerator.c
b/DynamicTablesPkg/Library/Acpi/Arm/AcpiSsdtCpuTopologyLibArm/SsdtCp
uT
opologyGenerator.c
index c24da8ec71..58f86ff508 100644
---
a/DynamicTablesPkg/Library/Acpi/Arm/AcpiSsdtCpuTopologyLibArm/SsdtCp
uT
opologyGenerator.c
+++
b/DynamicTablesPkg/Library/Acpi/Arm/AcpiSsdtCpuTopologyLibArm/Ssdt
+++ CpuTopologyGenerator.c
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
#include <Library/AcpiHelperLib.h>
#include <Library/TableHelperLib.h>
#include <Library/AmlLib/AmlLib.h>
+#include <Library/PcdLib.h>
#include <Protocol/ConfigurationManagerProtocol.h>
#include "SsdtCpuTopologyGenerator.h"
@@ -814,7 +815,8 @@ CreateAmlProcessorContainer (
Protocol Interface.
@param [in] NodeToken Token of the
CM_ARM_PROC_HIERARCHY_INFO
currently handled.
- Cannot be CM_NULL_TOKEN.
+ CM_NULL_TOKEN if top level container
+ should be created.
@param [in] ParentNode Parent node to attach the created
node to.
@param [in,out] ProcContainerIndex Pointer to the current
processor container @@ -841,12 +843,12 @@ CreateAmlCpuTopologyTree
(
AML_OBJECT_NODE_HANDLE ProcContainerNode;
UINT32 Uid;
UINT16 Name;
+ UINT32 NodeFlags;
ASSERT (Generator != NULL);
ASSERT (Generator->ProcNodeList != NULL);
ASSERT (Generator->ProcNodeCount != 0);
ASSERT (CfgMgrProtocol != NULL);
- ASSERT (NodeToken != CM_NULL_TOKEN);
ASSERT (ParentNode != NULL);
ASSERT (ProcContainerIndex != NULL);
@@ -893,8 +895,14 @@ CreateAmlCpuTopologyTree (
} else {
// If this is not a Cpu, then this is a processor container.
+ NodeFlags = Generator->ProcNodeList[Index].Flags;
+ // Allow physical property for top level nodes
+ if (NodeToken == CM_NULL_TOKEN) {
+ NodeFlags &= ~EFI_ACPI_6_3_PPTT_PACKAGE_PHYSICAL;
+ }
+
Even though it was never encountered so far, it should also be possible to
have a physical package consisting of only one CPU. So I guess it would be
better to create a function to check the flags, whether the ProcNode is a CPU
or a cluster.
I attached a Wip patch base on your work where such function is created.
Feel free to take it/modify it at your will.
// Acpi processor Id for clusters is not handled.
- if ((Generator->ProcNodeList[Index].Flags &
PPTT_PROCESSOR_MASK) !=
+ if ((NodeFlags & PPTT_PROCESSOR_MASK) !=
PPTT_CLUSTER_PROCESSOR_MASK)
{
DEBUG ((
@@ -973,10 +981,10 @@ CreateTopologyFromProcHierarchy (
IN AML_OBJECT_NODE_HANDLE ScopeNode
)
{
- EFI_STATUS Status;
- UINT32 Index;
- UINT32 TopLevelProcNodeIndex;
- UINT32 ProcContainerIndex;
+ EFI_STATUS Status;
+ UINT32 Index;
+ CM_OBJECT_TOKEN TopLevelToken;
+ UINT32 ProcContainerIndex;
ASSERT (Generator != NULL);
ASSERT (Generator->ProcNodeCount != 0); @@ -984,8 +992,8 @@
CreateTopologyFromProcHierarchy (
ASSERT (CfgMgrProtocol != NULL);
ASSERT (ScopeNode != NULL);
- TopLevelProcNodeIndex = MAX_UINT32;
- ProcContainerIndex = 0;
+ TopLevelToken = CM_NULL_TOKEN;
+ ProcContainerIndex = 0;
Status = TokenTableInitialize (Generator, Generator->ProcNodeCount);
if (EFI_ERROR (Status)) {
@@ -993,33 +1001,27 @@ CreateTopologyFromProcHierarchy (
return Status;
}
- // It is assumed that there is one unique
CM_ARM_PROC_HIERARCHY_INFO
- // structure with no ParentToken and the
EFI_ACPI_6_3_PPTT_PACKAGE_PHYSICAL
- // flag set. All other CM_ARM_PROC_HIERARCHY_INFO are non-physical
and
- // have a ParentToken.
- for (Index = 0; Index < Generator->ProcNodeCount; Index++) {
- if ((Generator->ProcNodeList[Index].ParentToken ==
CM_NULL_TOKEN) &&
- (Generator->ProcNodeList[Index].Flags &
- EFI_ACPI_6_3_PPTT_PACKAGE_PHYSICAL))
- {
- if (TopLevelProcNodeIndex != MAX_UINT32) {
- DEBUG ((
- DEBUG_ERROR,
- "ERROR: SSDT-CPU-TOPOLOGY: Top level
CM_ARM_PROC_HIERARCHY_INFO "
- "must be unique\n"
- ));
- ASSERT (0);
- goto exit_handler;
- }
+ if (!PcdGetBool (PcdForceTopLevelProcessorContainer)) {
+ for (Index = 0; Index < Generator->ProcNodeCount; Index++) {
+ if ((Generator->ProcNodeList[Index].ParentToken ==
CM_NULL_TOKEN) &&
+ (Generator->ProcNodeList[Index].Flags &
+ EFI_ACPI_6_3_PPTT_PACKAGE_PHYSICAL))
+ {
+ // Multi-socket detected, using top level containers
+ if (TopLevelToken != CM_NULL_TOKEN) {
+ TopLevelToken = CM_NULL_TOKEN;
+ break;
+ }
- TopLevelProcNodeIndex = Index;
- }
- } // for
+ TopLevelToken = Generator->ProcNodeList[Index].Token;
+ }
+ } // for
+ }
Status = CreateAmlCpuTopologyTree (
Generator,
CfgMgrProtocol,
- Generator->ProcNodeList[TopLevelProcNodeIndex].Token,
+ TopLevelToken,
ScopeNode,
&ProcContainerIndex
);
@@ -1106,7 +1108,7 @@ CreateTopologyFromGicC (
break;
}
}
- } // for
+ } // for
Is it possible to remove this change ?
return Status;
}
diff --git
a/DynamicTablesPkg/Library/Acpi/Arm/AcpiSsdtCpuTopologyLibArm/SsdtCp
uT
opologyLibArm.inf
b/DynamicTablesPkg/Library/Acpi/Arm/AcpiSsdtCpuTopologyLibArm/SsdtCp
uT
opologyLibArm.inf
index 3e2d154749..00adfe986f 100644
---
a/DynamicTablesPkg/Library/Acpi/Arm/AcpiSsdtCpuTopologyLibArm/SsdtCp
uT
opologyLibArm.inf
+++
b/DynamicTablesPkg/Library/Acpi/Arm/AcpiSsdtCpuTopologyLibArm/Ssdt
+++ CpuTopologyLibArm.inf
@@ -31,3 +31,7 @@
AcpiHelperLib
AmlLib
BaseLib
+ PcdLib
+
+[Pcd]
+
+gEdkiiDynamicTablesPkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdForceTopLevelProcessorConta
in
+er
