[GIT PULL] Fix RISC-V's arch-topology reporting

[Palmer Dabbelt]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 14:10:54 PDT (-0700), Conor.Dooley at microchip.com wrote:
> 
> 
> On 18/08/2022 22:03, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2022 15:14:55 PDT (-0700), Conor.Dooley at microchip.com wrote:
>>> Hey Will/Palmer/Sudeep,
>>>
>>> Catalin suggested [0] dropping the CC: stable for the arm64 patch and
>>> instead making it a specific prereq of the RISC-V patch & making a PR,
>>> so here we are.. I was still up when -rc1 came out so pushed it last
>>> night to get the test coverage, but LKP seems to not have reported a
>>> build success since early on the 13th so not holding my horses! I built
>>> it again for both ARMs and RISC-V myself.
>>>
>>> I tagged it tonight, so it's on conor/linux.git as riscv-topo-on-6.0-rc1
>>> with the prereq specified.
>>>
>>> Not sure if you want to merge this too Sudeep or if that's up to Greg?
>> 
>> It's a little bit vague what you're asking for here, so I'm just
>> going to kind of guessing here but this on riscv/for-next.  I'm not
>> sure if you were looking for me to just merge the arch/riscv bits or
>> if this should be on fixes (just looking at the patch makes it look
>> like it should be), but I don't want to send up some arm64 code to
>> fixes without it being pretty explicit that I should do so
> 
> Ahh sorry, I completely forgot to mention that Will said "for 5.21" in
> his response to my original patchset. for-next sounds fine to me - all
> in-tree devicetrees had the optional properties added to them that solve
> the issue - and they were AUTOSEL'ed too from what I can see.

OK, sounds like we're good then.

> 
> Thanks & sorry!
> Conor.
> 
>> 
>> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at rivosinc.com> # arch/riscv bits, for 6.0-rc
>> 
>> in case someone else wants to send it up before I get back to this,
>> I'm fine either way.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Conor.
>>>
>>> 0 - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/Ytac7G1zlq6WW4jt@arm.com/
>>>
>>> The following changes since commit 568035b01cfb107af8d2e4bd2fb9aea22cf5b868:
>>>
>>>   Linux 6.0-rc1 (2022-08-14 15:50:18 -0700)
>>>
>>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>>
>>>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/conor/linux.git/ tags/riscv-topo-on-6.0-rc1
>>>
>>> for you to fetch changes up to fbd92809997a391f28075f1c8b5ee314c225557c:
>>>
>>>   riscv: topology: fix default topology reporting (2022-08-15 22:07:34 +0100)
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Fix RISC-V's topology reporting
>>>
>>> The goal here is the fix the incorrectly reported arch topology on
>>> RISC-V which seems to have been broken since it was added.
>>> cpu, package and thread IDs are all currently reported as -1, so tools
>>> like lstopo think systems have multiple threads on the same core when
>>> this is not true:
>>> https://github.com/open-mpi/hwloc/issues/536
>>>
>>> arm64's topology code basically applies to RISC-V too, so it has been
>>> made generic along with the removal of MPIDR related code, which
>>> appears to be redudant code since '3102bc0e6ac7 ("arm64: topology: Stop
>>> using MPIDR for topology information")' replaced the code that actually
>>> interacted with MPIDR with default values.
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Conor Dooley (2):
>>>       arm64: topology: move store_cpu_topology() to shared code
>>>       riscv: topology: fix default topology reporting
>>>
>>>  arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 40 ----------------------------------------
>>>  arch/riscv/Kconfig           |  2 +-
>>>  arch/riscv/kernel/smpboot.c  |  3 ++-
>>>  drivers/base/arch_topology.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>  4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-riscv mailing list
>> linux-riscv at lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv