core: fix build error when referencing arch specific structures

Convert cpu_sibling_map to a per_cpu cpumask_t array for the ppc64 architecture.

Note: these changes have not been built nor tested.

Note: I also don't know if these changes are particularly relevant for the ppc64 architecture.

Signed-off-by Mike Travis <[email protected]>

---
 arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c        |    4 ++--
 arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c                 |    4 ++--
 arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/cbe_cpufreq.c |    2 +-
 include/asm-powerpc/smp.h                 |    3 ++-
 include/asm-powerpc/topology.h            |    2 +-
 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c +2 -2

@@ -415,9 +415,9 @@
 	 * Do the sibling map; assume only two threads per processor.
 	 */
 	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
-		cpu_set(cpu, cpu_sibling_map[cpu]);
+		cpu_set(cpu, cpu_sibling_map(cpu));
 		if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SMT))
-			cpu_set(cpu ^ 0x1, cpu_sibling_map[cpu]);
+			cpu_set(cpu ^ 0x1, cpu_sibling_map(cpu));
 	}
 
 	vdso_data->processorCount = num_present_cpus();

arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c +2 -2

@@ -61,11 +61,11 @@
 
 cpumask_t cpu_possible_map = CPU_MASK_NONE;
 cpumask_t cpu_online_map = CPU_MASK_NONE;
-cpumask_t cpu_sibling_map[NR_CPUS] = { [0 ... NR_CPUS-1] = CPU_MASK_NONE };
+DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_t, cpu_sibling_map) = CPU_MASK_NONE;
 
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_online_map);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_possible_map);
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_sibling_map);
+EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL(cpu_sibling_map);
 
 /* SMP operations for this machine */
 struct smp_ops_t *smp_ops;

arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/cbe_cpufreq.c +1 -1

@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@
 	policy->cur = cbe_freqs[cur_pmode].frequency;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
-	policy->cpus = cpu_sibling_map[policy->cpu];
+	policy->cpus = cpu_sibling_map(policy->cpu);
 #endif
 
 	cpufreq_frequency_table_get_attr(cbe_freqs, policy->cpu);

include/asm-powerpc/smp.h +2 -1

@@ -58,7 +58,8 @@
 					(smp_hw_index[(cpu)] = (phys))
 #endif
 
-extern cpumask_t cpu_sibling_map[NR_CPUS];
+DECLARE_PER_CPU(cpumask_t, cpu_sibling_map);
+#define cpu_sibling_map(cpu) per_cpu(cpu_sibling_map, cpu)
 
 /* Since OpenPIC has only 4 IPIs, we use slightly different message numbers.
  *

Quoted 77 lines · [email protected] wrote:

Convert cpu_sibling_map to a per_cpu cpumask_t array for the ppc64 architecture.

Note: these changes have not been built nor tested.

Note: I also don't know if these changes are particularly relevant for the ppc64 architecture.

Signed-off-by Mike Travis <[email protected]>

---
 arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c        |    4 ++--
 arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c                 |    4 ++--
 arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/cbe_cpufreq.c |    2 +-
 include/asm-powerpc/smp.h                 |    3 ++-
 include/asm-powerpc/topology.h            |    2 +-
 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c +2 -2

@@ -415,9 +415,9 @@
      * Do the sibling map; assume only two threads per processor.
      */
     for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
-        cpu_set(cpu, cpu_sibling_map[cpu]);
+        cpu_set(cpu, cpu_sibling_map(cpu));
         if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SMT))
-            cpu_set(cpu ^ 0x1, cpu_sibling_map[cpu]);
+            cpu_set(cpu ^ 0x1, cpu_sibling_map(cpu));
     }
 
     vdso_data->processorCount = num_present_cpus();

arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c +2 -2

@@ -61,11 +61,11 @@
 
 cpumask_t cpu_possible_map = CPU_MASK_NONE;
 cpumask_t cpu_online_map = CPU_MASK_NONE;
-cpumask_t cpu_sibling_map[NR_CPUS] = { [0 ... NR_CPUS-1] = 
 CPU_MASK_NONE };
+DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_t, cpu_sibling_map) = CPU_MASK_NONE;
 
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_online_map);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_possible_map);
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_sibling_map);
+EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL(cpu_sibling_map);
 
 /* SMP operations for this machine */

struct smp_ops_t *smp_ops;

arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/cbe_cpufreq.c +1 -1

@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@
     policy->cur = cbe_freqs[cur_pmode].frequency;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
-    policy->cpus = cpu_sibling_map[policy->cpu];
+    policy->cpus = cpu_sibling_map(policy->cpu);
 #endif
 
     cpufreq_frequency_table_get_attr(cbe_freqs, policy->cpu);

include/asm-powerpc/smp.h +2 -1

@@ -58,7 +58,8 @@
                     (smp_hw_index[(cpu)] = (phys))
 #endif
 
-extern cpumask_t cpu_sibling_map[NR_CPUS];
+DECLARE_PER_CPU(cpumask_t, cpu_sibling_map);
+#define cpu_sibling_map(cpu) per_cpu(cpu_sibling_map, cpu)
 
 /* Since OpenPIC has only 4 IPIs, we use slightly different message 

numbers.
*

include/asm-powerpc/topology.h line 114

Quoted 8 lines

include/asm-powerpc/topology.h +1 -1

@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@
 #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
 #include <asm/smp.h>
 
-#define topology_thread_siblings(cpu)    (cpu_sibling_map[cpu])
+#define topology_thread_siblings(cpu)    (cpu_sibling_map(cpu))
 #endif
 #endif
 

Hi Mike,

After applying the patch, the build fails with following error

CHK include/linux/version.h
CHK include/linux/utsrelease.h
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.s
In file included from include/linux/smp.h:19,
from include/linux/topology.h:33,
from include/linux/mmzone.h:660,
from include/linux/gfp.h:4,
from include/linux/slab.h:14,
from include/linux/percpu.h:5,
from include/asm/time.h:18,
from include/asm/cputime.h:26,
from include/linux/sched.h:65,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c:17:
include/asm/smp.h:61: error: expected declaration specifiers or ?...? before ?cpu_sibling_map? include/asm/smp.h:61: warning: data definition has no type or storage class include/asm/smp.h:61: warning: type defaults to ?int? in declaration of ?DECLARE_PER_CPU? make[1]: *** [arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error 1
make: *** [prepare0] Error 2

Thanks & Regards,
Kamalesh Babulal.

Quoted 112 lines · Kamalesh Babulal

Quoted 77 lines · [email protected] wrote:

Convert cpu_sibling_map to a per_cpu cpumask_t array for the ppc64 architecture.

Note: these changes have not been built nor tested.

Note: I also don't know if these changes are particularly relevant for the ppc64 architecture.

Signed-off-by Mike Travis <[email protected]>

---
 arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c        |    4 ++--
 arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c                 |    4 ++--
 arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/cbe_cpufreq.c |    2 +-
 include/asm-powerpc/smp.h                 |    3 ++-
 include/asm-powerpc/topology.h            |    2 +-
 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c +2 -2

@@ -415,9 +415,9 @@
      * Do the sibling map; assume only two threads per processor.
      */
     for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
-        cpu_set(cpu, cpu_sibling_map[cpu]);
+        cpu_set(cpu, cpu_sibling_map(cpu));
         if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SMT))
-            cpu_set(cpu ^ 0x1, cpu_sibling_map[cpu]);
+            cpu_set(cpu ^ 0x1, cpu_sibling_map(cpu));
     }
 
     vdso_data->processorCount = num_present_cpus();

arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c +2 -2

@@ -61,11 +61,11 @@
 
 cpumask_t cpu_possible_map = CPU_MASK_NONE;
 cpumask_t cpu_online_map = CPU_MASK_NONE;
-cpumask_t cpu_sibling_map[NR_CPUS] = { [0 ... NR_CPUS-1] =
 CPU_MASK_NONE };
+DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_t, cpu_sibling_map) = CPU_MASK_NONE;
 
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_online_map);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_possible_map);
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpu_sibling_map);
+EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL(cpu_sibling_map);
 
 /* SMP operations for this machine */

struct smp_ops_t *smp_ops;

arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/cbe_cpufreq.c +1 -1

@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@
     policy->cur = cbe_freqs[cur_pmode].frequency;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
-    policy->cpus = cpu_sibling_map[policy->cpu];
+    policy->cpus = cpu_sibling_map(policy->cpu);
 #endif
 
     cpufreq_frequency_table_get_attr(cbe_freqs, policy->cpu);

include/asm-powerpc/smp.h +2 -1

@@ -58,7 +58,8 @@
                     (smp_hw_index[(cpu)] = (phys))
 #endif
 
-extern cpumask_t cpu_sibling_map[NR_CPUS];
+DECLARE_PER_CPU(cpumask_t, cpu_sibling_map);
+#define cpu_sibling_map(cpu) per_cpu(cpu_sibling_map, cpu)
 
 /* Since OpenPIC has only 4 IPIs, we use slightly different message

numbers.
*

include/asm-powerpc/topology.h line 114

Quoted 8 lines

include/asm-powerpc/topology.h +1 -1

@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@
 #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
 #include <asm/smp.h>
 
-#define topology_thread_siblings(cpu)    (cpu_sibling_map[cpu])
+#define topology_thread_siblings(cpu)    (cpu_sibling_map(cpu))
 #endif
 #endif
 

Hi Mike,

After applying the patch, the build fails with following error

CHK include/linux/version.h
CHK include/linux/utsrelease.h
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.s
In file included from include/linux/smp.h:19,
from include/linux/topology.h:33,
from include/linux/mmzone.h:660,
from include/linux/gfp.h:4,
from include/linux/slab.h:14,
from include/linux/percpu.h:5,
from include/asm/time.h:18,
from include/asm/cputime.h:26,
from include/linux/sched.h:65,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c:17:
include/asm/smp.h:61: error: expected declaration specifiers or ?...? before ?cpu_sibling_map?
include/asm/smp.h:61: warning: data definition has no type or storage class
include/asm/smp.h:61: warning: type defaults to ?int? in declaration of ?DECLARE_PER_CPU?
make[1]: *** [arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.s] Error 1
make: *** [prepare0] Error 2

Quoted 2 lines

Thanks & Regards,
Kamalesh Babulal.

Hi Make,

I tried to debug and probably the patch below could help the build error

Signed-off-by Kamalesh Babulal <[email protected]>

----

include/asm-powerpc/smp.h 2007-09-07 18:16:02.000000000 +0530 renamed from include/asm-powerpc/smp.h 2007-09-07 18:15:43.000000000 +0530 +1 -1

@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
 #include <asm/paca.h>
+#include <asm/percpu.h>
 #endif
 
 extern int boot_cpuid;
 
---

Thanks & Regards,
Kamalesh Babulal.

Since the core kernel routines need to reference cpu_sibling_map, whether it be a static array or a per_cpu data variable, an access function has been defined.

In addition, changes have been made to the ia64 and ppc64 arch's to move the cpu_sibling_map from a static cpumask_t array [NR_CPUS] to be per_cpu cpumask_t arrays.

Note that I do not have the ability to build or test patch 3/3, the ppc64 changes.

Patches are referenced against 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 .

Quoted 8 lines · On Friday 07 September 2007 05:09, [email protected] wrote:

Since the core kernel routines need to reference cpu_sibling_map, whether it be a static array or a per_cpu data variable, an access function has been defined.

In addition, changes have been made to the ia64 and ppc64 arch's to move the cpu_sibling_map from a static cpumask_t array [NR_CPUS] to be per_cpu cpumask_t arrays.

Quoted 4 lines

Note that I do not have the ability to build or test patch 3/3, the ppc64 changes.

Patches are referenced against 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 .

It would be better if you could redo the patches with the original patches reverted, not incremental changes. In the end we'll need a full patch set with full changelog anyways, not a series of incremental fixes.

Also I guess some powerpc testers would be needed. Perhaps cc the maintainers?

Quoted 10 lines · On Fri, 7 Sep 2007 08:28:05 +0100 Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:

Quoted 8 lines · On Friday 07 September 2007 05:09, [email protected] wrote:

Since the core kernel routines need to reference cpu_sibling_map, whether it be a static array or a per_cpu data variable, an access function has been defined.

In addition, changes have been made to the ia64 and ppc64 arch's to move the cpu_sibling_map from a static cpumask_t array [NR_CPUS] to be per_cpu cpumask_t arrays.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Note that I do not have the ability to build or test patch 3/3, the ppc64 changes.

Patches are referenced against 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 .

It would be better if you could redo the patches with the original patches reverted, not incremental changes. In the end we'll need a full patch set with full changelog anyways, not a series of incremental fixes.

yup

Quoted 3 lines

Also I guess some powerpc testers would be needed. Perhaps cc the maintainers?

yup

All architectures except sparc64 are now done - please have a shot at doing sparc64 as well.

I'd suggest that we not implement that cpu_sibling_map() macro and just open-code the per_cpu() everywhere. So henceforth any architecture which implements CONFIG_SCHED_SMT must implement the per-cpu sibling map.

That's nice and simple, and avoids the unpleasant pretend-function-used-as-an-lvalue trick. (Well OK, per_cpu() does that, but let's avoid resinning).

Quoted 8 lines · On Friday 07 September 2007 05:09, [email protected] wrote:

Since the core kernel routines need to reference cpu_sibling_map, whether it be a static array or a per_cpu data variable, an access function has been defined.

In addition, changes have been made to the ia64 and ppc64 arch's to move the cpu_sibling_map from a static cpumask_t array [NR_CPUS] to be per_cpu cpumask_t arrays.

Quoted 4 lines

Note that I do not have the ability to build or test patch 3/3, the ppc64 changes.

Patches are referenced against 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 .

It would be better if you could redo the patches with the original patches reverted, not incremental changes. In the end we'll need a full patch set with full changelog anyways, not a series of incremental fixes.

Also I guess some powerpc testers would be needed. Perhaps cc the maintainers?