[PATCH RFC 1/3] drivers: base: support cpu cache information interface to userspace via sysfs

Sudeep Holla Sudeep.Holla at arm.com
Thu Jan 9 14:19:00 EST 2014


On 08/01/14 20:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 07:26:06PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com>
>>
>> This patch adds initial support for providing processor cache information
>> to userspace through sysfs interface. This is based on x86 implementation
>> and hence the interface is intended to be fully compatible.
>>
>> A per-cpu array of cache information maintained is used mainly for
>> sysfs-related book keeping.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/base/Makefile     |   2 +-
>>  drivers/base/cacheinfo.c  | 296 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  include/linux/cacheinfo.h |  43 +++++++
>>  3 files changed, 340 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>  create mode 100644 drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
>>  create mode 100644 include/linux/cacheinfo.h
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/Makefile b/drivers/base/Makefile
>> index 94e8a80..76f07c8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/base/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/base/Makefile
>> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ obj-y			:= core.o bus.o dd.o syscore.o \
>>  			   driver.o class.o platform.o \
>>  			   cpu.o firmware.o init.o map.o devres.o \
>>  			   attribute_container.o transport_class.o \
>> -			   topology.o
>> +			   topology.o cacheinfo.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DEVTMPFS)	+= devtmpfs.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_DMA_CMA) += dma-contiguous.o
>>  obj-y			+= power/
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..f436c31
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,296 @@
>> +/*
>> + * cacheinfo support - processor cache information via sysfs
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (C) 2013 ARM Ltd.
>> + * All Rights Reserved
>> + *
>> + * Author: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com>
>> + *
>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>> + *
>> + * This program is distributed "as is" WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY of any
>> + * kind, whether express or implied; without even the implied warranty
>> + * of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
>> + */
>> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
>> +#include <linux/cacheinfo.h>
>> +#include <linux/compiler.h>
>> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
>> +#include <linux/device.h>
>> +#include <linux/init.h>
>> +#include <linux/kobject.h>
>> +#include <linux/of.h>
>> +#include <linux/sched.h>
>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>> +#include <linux/smp.h>
>> +#include <linux/sysfs.h>
>> +
>> +struct cache_attr {
>> +	struct attribute attr;
>> +	 ssize_t(*show) (unsigned int, unsigned short, char *);
>> +	 ssize_t(*store) (unsigned int, unsigned short, const char *, size_t);
>> +};
>> +
>> +/* pointer to kobject for cpuX/cache */
>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct kobject *, ci_cache_kobject);
>> +#define per_cpu_cache_kobject(cpu)     (per_cpu(ci_cache_kobject, cpu))
>> +
>> +struct index_kobject {
>> +	struct kobject kobj;
>> +	unsigned int cpu;
>> +	unsigned short index;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static cpumask_t cache_dev_map;
>> +
>> +/* pointer to array of kobjects for cpuX/cache/indexY */
> 
> Please don't use "raw" kobjects for this, use the device attribute
> groups, that's what they are there for.  Bonus is that your code should
> get a lot simpler when you do that.
> 

Yes I now understand device attribute group simplifies the code, but I think
kobjects are still needed as we need to track both cpu and cache index.
By reusing only cpu device kobject, we can track cpu only.

Please correct me if I am missing to understand something here.

One thought I have is to make cache_info structure common to all architecture
(for now its ARM specific) and introduce kobject in that similar to ia64
implementation. That even eliminates lot of weak functions defined.

Regards,
Sudeep






More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list