On 10/08/15 19:19, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 08/10/2015 06:36 PM, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
On 10/08/15 17:06, Catalin Marinas wrote:
Hi Suzuki,
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:43:47AM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <[email protected]>
Documentation of the infrastructure
Signed-off-by: Suzuki K. Poulose <[email protected]>
The implementation looks fine but I think the main discussion will be
around the goal of this feature and the ABI that it introduces. So I'll
just write my thoughts on this patch (I could as well have replied to
the cover letter).
Another question: who's going to use this feature? I know people asked
in private but I'd like to have some public statements.
Right, I am hoping that folks from glibc / JIT / GCC will respond to
this thread.
We certainly need it for OpenJDK. We need to know the manufacturer,
part number, revision id, etc. We already have workarounds in
OpenJDK for various bugs, and we also can generate better code if we
know the exact part.
OK.
I note that the REVIDR is not in this patch. That seems odd, because
it can be used to identify minor revisions.
The REVIDR has to be used in conjunction with the MIDR to make real sense.
We cannot guarantee that the REVIDR that we read (would) belong to the CPU
where MIDR would have been read (unless the process is pinned) and hence the
user may not be able to make any use of the information. Steve has a patch [1]
to expose the MIDR,REVIDR info via sysfs.
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/24/420
Thanks
Suzuki
Andrew.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
