[PATCH v5 2/4] Documentation: arm64/arm: dt bindings for numa.
Hanjun Guo
hanjun.guo at linaro.org
Wed Oct 14 06:21:23 PDT 2015
On 10/14/2015 12:47 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> Hi Mark,
>>>
>>> i am thinking, if we could not address(or becomes complex) these topologies
>>> using associativity,
>>> we should think of an alternate binding which suits existing and upcoming
>>> arm64 platforms.
>>> can we think of below numa binding which is inline with ACPI and will
>>> address all sort of topologies!
>>>
>>> i am proposing as below,
>>>
>>> 1. introduce "proximity" node property. this property will be
>>> present in dt nodes like memory, cpu, bus and devices(like associativity
>>> property) and
>>> will tell which numa node(proximity domain) this dt node belongs to.
>>>
>>> examples:
>>> cpu at 000 {
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> compatible = "cavium,thunder", "arm,armv8";
>>> reg = <0x0 0x000>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> proximity = <0>;
>>> };
>>> cpu at 001 {
>>> device_type = "cpu";
>>> compatible = "cavium,thunder", "arm,armv8";
>>> reg = <0x0 0x001>;
>>> enable-method = "psci";
>>> proximity = <1>;
>>> };
>>>
>>> memory at 00000000 {
>>> device_type = "memory";
>>> reg = <0x0 0x01400000 0x3 0xFEC00000>;
>>> proximity =<0>;
>>>
>>> };
>>>
>>> memory at 10000000000 {
>>> device_type = "memory";
>>> reg = <0x100 0x00400000 0x3 0xFFC00000>;
>>> proximity =<1>;
>>> };
>>>
>>> pcie0 at 0x8480,00000000 {
>>> compatible = "cavium,thunder-pcie";
>>> device_type = "pci";
>>> msi-parent = <&its>;
>>> bus-range = <0 255>;
>>> #size-cells = <2>;
>>> #address-cells = <3>;
>>> #stream-id-cells = <1>;
>>> reg = <0x8480 0x00000000 0 0x10000000>; /*Configuration
>>> space */
>>> ranges = <0x03000000 0x8010 0x00000000 0x8010 0x00000000
>>> 0x70 0x00000000>, /* mem ranges */
>>> <0x03000000 0x8300 0x00000000 0x8300 0x00000000
>>> 0x500 0x00000000>;
>>> proximity =<0>;
>>> };
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. Introduce new dt node "proximity-map" which will capture the NxN numa
>>> node distance matrix.
>>>
>>> for example, 4 nodes connected in mesh/ring structure as,
>>> A(0) <connected to> B(1) <connected to> C(2) <connected to> D(3) <connected
>>> to> A(1)
>>>
>>> relative distance would be,
>>> A -> B = 20
>>> B -> C = 20
>>> C -> D = 20
>>> D -> A = 20
>>> A -> C = 40
>>> B -> D = 40
>>>
>>> and dt presentation for this distance matrix is :
>>>
>>> proximity-map {
>>> node-count = <4>;
>>> distance-matrix = <0 0 10>,
>>> <0 1 20>,
>>> <0 2 40>,
>>> <0 3 20>,
>>> <1 0 20>,
>>> <1 1 10>,
>>> <1 2 20>,
>>> <1 3 40>,
>>> <2 0 40>,
>>> <2 1 20>,
>>> <2 2 10>,
>>> <2 3 20>,
>>> <3 0 20>,
>>> <3 1 40>,
>>> <3 2 20>,
>>> <3 3 10>;
>>> }
>>>
>>> the entries like < 0 0 > < 1 1> < 2 2> < 3 3> can be optional and code can
>>> put default value(local distance).
>>> the entries like <1 0> can be optional if <0 1> and <1 0> are of same
>>> distance.
>> is this binding looks ok?
>
> This looks roughly requivalent to the ACPI SLIT, which means it's as
> powerful, which allays my previous concerns.
Cool, I think those bindings are quite extensible and easy understood.
Thanks
Hanjun
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list