Commit 55b47182 authored by Dave Olson's avatar Dave Olson Committed by Sasha Levin

powerpc: Fix missing L2 cache size in /sys/devices/system/cpu

[ Upstream commit f7e9e358 ]

This problem appears to have been introduced in 2.6.29 by commit
93197a36 "Rewrite sysfs processor cache info code".

This caused lscpu to error out on at least e500v2 devices, eg:

  error: cannot open /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cache/index2/size: No such file or directory

Some embedded powerpc systems use cache-size in DTS for the unified L2
cache size, not d-cache-size, so we need to allow for both DTS names.
Added a new CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED_D cache_type_info structure to handle
this.

Fixes: 93197a36 ("powerpc: Rewrite sysfs processor cache info code")
Signed-off-by: default avatarDave Olson <olson@cumulusnetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarMichael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Signed-off-by: default avatarSasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
parent 94581820
...@@ -61,11 +61,21 @@ struct cache_type_info { ...@@ -61,11 +61,21 @@ struct cache_type_info {
}; };
/* These are used to index the cache_type_info array. */ /* These are used to index the cache_type_info array. */
#define CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED 0 #define CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED 0 /* cache-size, cache-block-size, etc. */
#define CACHE_TYPE_INSTRUCTION 1 #define CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED_D 1 /* d-cache-size, d-cache-block-size, etc */
#define CACHE_TYPE_DATA 2 #define CACHE_TYPE_INSTRUCTION 2
#define CACHE_TYPE_DATA 3
static const struct cache_type_info cache_type_info[] = { static const struct cache_type_info cache_type_info[] = {
{
/* Embedded systems that use cache-size, cache-block-size,
* etc. for the Unified (typically L2) cache. */
.name = "Unified",
.size_prop = "cache-size",
.line_size_props = { "cache-line-size",
"cache-block-size", },
.nr_sets_prop = "cache-sets",
},
{ {
/* PowerPC Processor binding says the [di]-cache-* /* PowerPC Processor binding says the [di]-cache-*
* must be equal on unified caches, so just use * must be equal on unified caches, so just use
...@@ -293,7 +303,8 @@ static struct cache *cache_find_first_sibling(struct cache *cache) ...@@ -293,7 +303,8 @@ static struct cache *cache_find_first_sibling(struct cache *cache)
{ {
struct cache *iter; struct cache *iter;
if (cache->type == CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED) if (cache->type == CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED ||
cache->type == CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED_D)
return cache; return cache;
list_for_each_entry(iter, &cache_list, list) list_for_each_entry(iter, &cache_list, list)
...@@ -324,16 +335,29 @@ static bool cache_node_is_unified(const struct device_node *np) ...@@ -324,16 +335,29 @@ static bool cache_node_is_unified(const struct device_node *np)
return of_get_property(np, "cache-unified", NULL); return of_get_property(np, "cache-unified", NULL);
} }
static struct cache *cache_do_one_devnode_unified(struct device_node *node, /*
int level) * Unified caches can have two different sets of tags. Most embedded
* use cache-size, etc. for the unified cache size, but open firmware systems
* use d-cache-size, etc. Check on initialization for which type we have, and
* return the appropriate structure type. Assume it's embedded if it isn't
* open firmware. If it's yet a 3rd type, then there will be missing entries
* in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cache/index2/, and this code will need
* to be extended further.
*/
static int cache_is_unified_d(const struct device_node *np)
{ {
struct cache *cache; return of_get_property(np,
cache_type_info[CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED_D].size_prop, NULL) ?
CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED_D : CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED;
}
/*
*/
static struct cache *cache_do_one_devnode_unified(struct device_node *node, int level)
{
pr_debug("creating L%d ucache for %s\n", level, node->full_name); pr_debug("creating L%d ucache for %s\n", level, node->full_name);
cache = new_cache(CACHE_TYPE_UNIFIED, level, node); return new_cache(cache_is_unified_d(node), level, node);
return cache;
} }
static struct cache *cache_do_one_devnode_split(struct device_node *node, static struct cache *cache_do_one_devnode_split(struct device_node *node,
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment