Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/setup_64: Set cache-line-size based on cache-block-size
Chris Packham writes:
> On Thu, 2020-04-16 at 21:43 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Chris Packham writes:
>> > On Wed, 2020-03-25 at 16:18 +1300, Chris Packham wrote:
>> > > If {i,d}-cache-block-size is set and {i,d}-cache-line-size is
>> > > not,
>> > > use
>> > > the block-size value for both. Per the devicetree spec cache-
>> > > line-
>> > > size
>> > > is only needed if it differs from the block size.
>> > >
>> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Packham
>> > > ---
>> > > It looks as though the bsizep = lsizep is not required per the
>> > > spec
>> > > but it's
>> > > probably safer to retain it.
>> > >
>> > > Changes in v2:
>> > > - Scott pointed out that u-boot should be filling in the cache
>> > > properties
>> > > (which it does). But it does not specify a cache-line-size
>> > > because
>> > > it
>> > > provides a cache-block-size and the spec says you don't have to
>> > > if
>> > > they are
>> > > the same. So the error is in the parsing not in the devicetree
>> > > itself.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Ping? This thread went kind of quiet.
>>
>> I replied in the other thread:
>>
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/87369xx99u@mpe.ellerman.id.au/
>>
>> But then the merge window happened which is a busy time.
>>
>
> Yeah I figured that was the case.
>
>> What I'd really like is a v3 that incorporates the info I wrote in
>> the
>> other thread and a Fixes tag.
>>
>> If you feel like doing that, that would be great. Otherwise I'll do
>> it
>> tomorrow.
>
> I'll rebase against Linus's tree and have a go a adding some more words
> to the commit message.
Thanks.
cheers
Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/setup_64: Set cache-line-size based on cache-block-size
On Thu, 2020-04-16 at 21:43 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Chris Packham writes:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > On Wed, 2020-03-25 at 16:18 +1300, Chris Packham wrote:
> > > If {i,d}-cache-block-size is set and {i,d}-cache-line-size is
> > > not,
> > > use
> > > the block-size value for both. Per the devicetree spec cache-
> > > line-
> > > size
> > > is only needed if it differs from the block size.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Packham
> > > ---
> > > It looks as though the bsizep = lsizep is not required per the
> > > spec
> > > but it's
> > > probably safer to retain it.
> > >
> > > Changes in v2:
> > > - Scott pointed out that u-boot should be filling in the cache
> > > properties
> > > (which it does). But it does not specify a cache-line-size
> > > because
> > > it
> > > provides a cache-block-size and the spec says you don't have to
> > > if
> > > they are
> > > the same. So the error is in the parsing not in the devicetree
> > > itself.
> > >
> >
> > Ping? This thread went kind of quiet.
>
> I replied in the other thread:
>
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/87369xx99u@mpe.ellerman.id.au/
>
> But then the merge window happened which is a busy time.
>
Yeah I figured that was the case.
> What I'd really like is a v3 that incorporates the info I wrote in
> the
> other thread and a Fixes tag.
>
> If you feel like doing that, that would be great. Otherwise I'll do
> it
> tomorrow.
I'll rebase against Linus's tree and have a go a adding some more words
to the commit message.
>
> cheers
Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/setup_64: Set cache-line-size based on cache-block-size
Chris Packham writes:
> Hi All,
>
> On Wed, 2020-03-25 at 16:18 +1300, Chris Packham wrote:
>> If {i,d}-cache-block-size is set and {i,d}-cache-line-size is not,
>> use
>> the block-size value for both. Per the devicetree spec cache-line-
>> size
>> is only needed if it differs from the block size.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham
>> ---
>> It looks as though the bsizep = lsizep is not required per the spec
>> but it's
>> probably safer to retain it.
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Scott pointed out that u-boot should be filling in the cache
>> properties
>> (which it does). But it does not specify a cache-line-size because
>> it
>> provides a cache-block-size and the spec says you don't have to if
>> they are
>> the same. So the error is in the parsing not in the devicetree
>> itself.
>>
>
> Ping? This thread went kind of quiet.
I replied in the other thread:
https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/87369xx99u@mpe.ellerman.id.au/
But then the merge window happened which is a busy time.
What I'd really like is a v3 that incorporates the info I wrote in the
other thread and a Fixes tag.
If you feel like doing that, that would be great. Otherwise I'll do it
tomorrow.
cheers
Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/setup_64: Set cache-line-size based on cache-block-size
Hi All,
On Wed, 2020-03-25 at 16:18 +1300, Chris Packham wrote:
> If {i,d}-cache-block-size is set and {i,d}-cache-line-size is not,
> use
> the block-size value for both. Per the devicetree spec cache-line-
> size
> is only needed if it differs from the block size.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham
> ---
> It looks as though the bsizep = lsizep is not required per the spec
> but it's
> probably safer to retain it.
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Scott pointed out that u-boot should be filling in the cache
> properties
> (which it does). But it does not specify a cache-line-size because
> it
> provides a cache-block-size and the spec says you don't have to if
> they are
> the same. So the error is in the parsing not in the devicetree
> itself.
>
Ping? This thread went kind of quiet.
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c
> b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c
> index e05e6dd67ae6..dd8a238b54b8 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c
> @@ -516,6 +516,8 @@ static bool __init parse_cache_info(struct
> device_node *np,
> lsizep = of_get_property(np, propnames[3], NULL);
> if (bsizep == NULL)
> bsizep = lsizep;
> + if (lsizep == NULL)
> + lsizep = bsizep;
> if (lsizep != NULL)
> lsize = be32_to_cpu(*lsizep);
> if (bsizep != NULL)
