[PATCH] arm64: cpuinfo: Expose MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 to sysfs

Mark Rutland mark.rutland at arm.com
Mon Jun 13 02:07:37 PDT 2016


On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 06:02:21PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 04:19:44PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > From: Steve Capper <steve.capper at linaro.org>
> > 
> > It can be useful for JIT software to be aware of MIDR_EL1 and
> > REVIDR_EL1 to ascertain the presence of any core errata that could
> > affect codegen.
> > 
> > This patch exposes these registers through sysfs:
> > 
> > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu$ID/identification/midr
> > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu$ID/identification/revidr
> > 
> > where $ID is the cpu number. For big.LITTLE systems, one can have a
> > mixture of cores (e.g. Cortex A53 and Cortex A57), thus all CPUs need
> > to be enumerated.
> > 
> > If the kernel does not have valid information to populate these entries
> > with, an empty string is returned to userspace.
> > 
> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon at arm.com>
> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Steve Capper <steve.capper at linaro.org>
> > [ Return error for access to !present CPU registers ]
> > Signed-off-by: Suzuki K. Poulose <suzuki.poulose at arm.com>
> > ---
> > Changes since V2:
> >   - Fix errno for failures (Spotted-by: Russell King)
> >   - Roll back, if we encounter a missing cpu device
> >   - Return error for access to registers of CPUs not present.
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu.h |  1 +
> >  arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c  | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 70 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu.h
> > index 13a6103..116a382 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu.h
> > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ struct cpuinfo_arm64 {
> >  	u32		reg_cntfrq;
> >  	u32		reg_dczid;
> >  	u32		reg_midr;
> > +	u32		reg_revidr;
> >  
> >  	u64		reg_id_aa64dfr0;
> >  	u64		reg_id_aa64dfr1;
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c
> > index c173d32..c2d0c42 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c
> > @@ -212,6 +212,7 @@ static void __cpuinfo_store_cpu(struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info)
> >  	info->reg_ctr = read_cpuid_cachetype();
> >  	info->reg_dczid = read_cpuid(DCZID_EL0);
> >  	info->reg_midr = read_cpuid_id();
> > +	info->reg_revidr = read_cpuid(REVIDR_EL1);
> >  
> >  	info->reg_id_aa64dfr0 = read_cpuid(ID_AA64DFR0_EL1);
> >  	info->reg_id_aa64dfr1 = read_cpuid(ID_AA64DFR1_EL1);
> > @@ -264,3 +265,71 @@ void __init cpuinfo_store_boot_cpu(void)
> >  	boot_cpu_data = *info;
> >  	init_cpu_features(&boot_cpu_data);
> >  }
> > +
> > +#define CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(_name)							\
> > +	static ssize_t show_##_name (struct device *dev,			\
> > +			struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)		\
> > +	{									\
> > +		struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info = &per_cpu(cpu_data, dev->id);	\
> > +		if (!cpu_present(dev->id))					\
> > +			return -ENODEV;						\
> > +										\
> > +		if (info->reg_midr)						\
> > +			return sprintf(buf, "0x%016x\n", info->reg_##_name);	\
> 
> Should this be 0x%08x, as these are 32-bit registers?

That's a difficult question to answer. Per C5.1.1, "Principles of the
System instruction class encoding" in ARM DDI 0487A.i, when a system
register is escribed as 32-bit, this only means that the upper 32 bits
are RES0, not that they will never be made use of.

CLIDR_EL1 (previously described as a 32-bit register) is now a 64-bit
register, so clearly extension is possible.

I imagine that otehr registers (e.g. MIDR_EL1) may also get extended in
future, and I think we need to treat "32-bit registers" as 64-bit, to
account for future allocation of the RES0 bits.

On that note, we should probably rework the sanity checks code to read
all registers as 64 bit.

Thanks,
Mark.



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list