On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 10:17 PM Atish Patra <atish.pa...@wdc.com> wrote: > > On 9/12/18 7:38 AM, Anup Patel wrote: > > Currently, /proc/cpuinfo show logical CPU ID as Hart ID which > > is in-correct. This patch shows CPU ID and Hart ID separately > > in /proc/cpuinfo using cpuid_to_hardid_map(). > > > > With this patch, contents of /proc/cpuinfo looks as follows: > > cpu : 0 > > hart : 1 > > isa : rv64imafdcsu > > mmu : sv48 > > > > cpu : 1 > > hart : 0 > > isa : rv64imafdcsu > > mmu : sv48 > > > > cpu : 2 > > hart : 3 > > isa : rv64imafdcsu > > mmu : sv48 > > > > cpu : 3 > > hart : 2 > > isa : rv64imafdcsu > > mmu : sv48 > > > > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <a...@brainfault.org> > > --- > > arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c > > index f0f0ec2737b7..7c1342e242e6 100644 > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c > > @@ -87,7 +87,8 @@ static int c_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v) > > NULL); > > const char *compat, *isa, *mmu; > > > > - seq_printf(m, "hart\t: %lu\n", cpu_id); > > + seq_printf(m, "cpu\t: %lu\n", cpu_id); > > + seq_printf(m, "hart\t: %lu\n", cpuid_to_hardid_map(cpu_id)); > > if (!of_property_read_string(node, "riscv,isa", &isa) > > && isa[0] == 'r' > > && isa[1] == 'v') > > > > The extra hart information will not be parsed by lscpu which will make > the cpu information inconsistent between lscpu & /proc/cpuinfo. > > Should we patch lscpu as well to show correct hart id as well ?
Yes, we should certainly patch lscpu to parse CPU ID and HART ID differently. Regards, Anup
