Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 30 Jun 2022 18:35:13 +0100 | From | Sudeep Holla <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 09/19] arch_topology: Use the last level cache information from the cacheinfo |
| |
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 04:37:50PM +0000, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote: > On 30/06/2022 11:39, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > > I can't think of any reason for that to happen unless detect_cache_attributes > > is failing from init_cpu_topology and we are ignoring that. > > > > Are all RISC-V platforms failing on -next or is it just this platform ? > > I don't know. I only have SoCs with this core complex & one that does not > work with upstream. I can try my other board with this SoC - but I am on > leave at the moment w/ a computer or internet during the day so it may be > a few days before I can try it. >
Sure, no worries.
> However, Niklas Cassel has tried to use the Canaan K210 on next-20220630 > but had issues with RCU stalling: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/Yr3PKR0Uj1bE5Y6O@x1-carbon/T/#m52016996fcf5fa0501066d73352ed8e806803e06 > Not going to claim any relation, but that's minus 1 to the platforms that > can be used to test this on upstream RISC-V. >
Ah OK, will check and ask full logs to see if there is any relation.
> > We may have to try with some logs in detect_cache_attributes, > > last_level_cache_is_valid and last_level_cache_is_shared to check where it > > is going wrong. > > > > It must be crashing in smp_callin->update_siblings_masks->last_level_cache_is_shared > > Yeah, I was playing around last night for a while but didn't figure out the > root cause. I'll try again tonight. >
OK, thanks for that. I tried qemu, but doesn't have any cache info in DT provided by qemu itself. The other sifive_u machine didn't work on qemu, only virt booted with mainline as well.
> In the meantime, would you mind taking the patches out of -next?
I don't want to take out as we will loose all the test coverage. I would like to know if any other RISC-V platform is affected or not before removing it.
> FWIW I repro'd the failure on next-20220630.
Yes, nothing has changed yet.
-- Regards, Sudeep
| |