ACPI: Support generic initiator proximity domains
Subsystems (8)
v3 cover ACPI: Support generic initiator proximity domains
Changes since RFC V2.
* RFC dropped as now we have x86 support, so the lack of guards in in the ACPI code etc should now be fine.
* Added x86 support. Note this has only been tested on QEMU as I don't have a convenient x86 NUMA machine to play with. Note that this fitted together rather differently form arm64 so I'm particularly interested in feedback on the two solutions.
Since RFC V1.
* Fix incorrect interpretation of the ACPI entry noted by Keith Busch
* Use the acpica headers definitions that are now in mmotm.
It's worth noting that, to safely put a given device in a GI node, may require changes to the existing drivers as it's not unusual to assume you have local memory or processor core. There may be futher constraints not yet covered by this patch.
Original cover letter...
ACPI 6.3 introduced a new entity that can be part of a NUMA proximity domain. It may share such a domain with the existing options (memory, cpu etc) but it may also exist on it's own.
The intent is to allow the description of the NUMA properties (particulary via HMAT) of accelerators and other initiators of memory activity that are not the host processor running the operating system.
This patch set introduces 'just enough' to make them work for arm64 and x86. It should be trivial to support other architectures, I just don't suitable NUMA systems readily available to test.
There are a few quirks that need to be considered.
1. Fall back nodes
******************
As pre ACPI 6.3 supporting operating systems do not have Generic Initiator Proximity Domains it is possible to specify, via _PXM in DSDT that another device is part of such a GI only node. This currently blows up spectacularly.
Whilst we can obviously 'now' protect against such a situation (see the related thread on PCI _PXM support and the threadripper board identified there as also falling into the problem of using non existent nodes
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10723311/ ), there is no way to be sure we will never have legacy OSes that are not protected against this. It would also be 'non ideal' to fallback to a default node as there may be a better (non GI) node to pick if GI nodes aren't available.
The work around is that we also have a new system wide OSC bit that allows an operating system to 'annouce' that it supports Generic Initiators. This allows, the firmware to us DSDT magic to 'move' devices between the nodes dependent on whether our new nodes are there or not.
2. New ways of assigning a proximity domain for devices
*******************************************************
Until now, the only way firmware could indicate that a particular device (outside the 'special' set of cpus etc) was to be found in a particular Proximity Domain by the use of _PXM in DSDT.
That is equally valid with GI domains, but we have new options. The SRAT affinity structure includes a handle (ACPI or PCI) to identify devices with the system and specify their proximity domain that way. If both _PXM and this are provided, they should give the same answer.
For now this patch set completely ignores that feature as we don't need it to start the discussion. It will form a follow up set at some point (if no one else fancies doing it).
Jonathan Cameron (4):
ACPI: Support Generic Initiator only domains
arm64: Support Generic Initiator only domains
x86: Support Generic Initiator only proximity domains
ACPI: Let ACPI know we support Generic Initiator Affinity Structures
arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 8 +++++ arch/x86/include/asm/numa.h | 2 ++ arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 1 + arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 14 ++++++++ drivers/acpi/bus.c | 1 + drivers/acpi/numa.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/base/node.c | 3 ++ include/asm-generic/topology.h | 3 ++ include/linux/acpi.h | 1 + include/linux/nodemask.h | 1 + include/linux/topology.h | 7 ++++ 11 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.19.1
PATCH v3 1/4 ACPI: Support Generic Initiator only domains
Generic Initiators are a new ACPI concept that allows for the description of proximity domains that contain a device which performs memory access (such as a network card) but neither host CPU nor Memory.
This patch has the parsing code and provides the infrastructure for an architecture to associate these new domains with their nearest memory processing node.
--- drivers/acpi/numa.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/base/node.c | 3 ++ include/asm-generic/topology.h | 3 ++ include/linux/nodemask.h | 1 + include/linux/topology.h | 7 ++++ 5 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/acpi/numa.c +61 -1
@@ -184,6 +184,38 @@ acpi_table_print_srat_entry(struct acpi_subtable_header *header) }break ; +case ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_GENERIC_AFFINITY : + { +struct acpi_srat_generic_affinity *p = + (struct acpi_srat_generic_affinity *)header; +char name[9 ] = {}; + +if (p->device_handle_type ==0 ) { +/* +* For pci devices this may be the only place they +* are assigned a proximity domain +*/ +pr_debug ("SRAT Generic Initiator(Seg:%u BDF:%u) in proximity domain %d %s\n" , + *(u16 *)(&p->device_handle[0 ]), + *(u16 *)(&p->device_handle[2 ]), + p->proximity_domain, + (p->flags &ACPI_SRAT_GENERIC_AFFINITY_ENABLED ) ? +"enabled" :"disabled" ); + }else { +/* +* In this case we can rely on the device having a +* proximity domain reference +*/ +memcpy (name, p->device_handle,8 ); +pr_info ("SRAT Generic Initiator(HID=%.8s UID=%.4s) in proximity domain %d %s\n" , + (char *)(&p->device_handle[0 ]), + (char *)(&p->device_handle[8 ]), + p->proximity_domain, + (p->flags &ACPI_SRAT_GENERIC_AFFINITY_ENABLED ) ? +"enabled" :"disabled" ); + } + } +break ;default :pr_warn ("Found unsupported SRAT entry (type = 0x%x)\n" , header->type);
@@ -392,6 +424,32 @@ acpi_parse_gicc_affinity(struct acpi_subtable_header *header,return 0 ; } +static int __init +acpi_parse_gi_affinity (struct acpi_subtable_header *header, +const unsigned long end) +{ +struct acpi_srat_generic_affinity *gi_affinity; +int node; + + gi_affinity = (struct acpi_srat_generic_affinity *)header; +if (!gi_affinity) +return -EINVAL ; +acpi_table_print_srat_entry (header); + +if (!(gi_affinity->flags &ACPI_SRAT_GENERIC_AFFINITY_ENABLED )) +return -EINVAL ; + + node =acpi_map_pxm_to_node (gi_affinity->proximity_domain); +if (node ==NUMA_NO_NODE || node >=MAX_NUMNODES ) { +pr_err ("SRAT: Too many proximity domains.\n" ); +return -EINVAL ; + } +node_set (node, numa_nodes_parsed); +node_set_state (node,N_GENERIC_INITIATOR ); + +return 0 ; +} +static int __initdata parsed_numa_memblks; static int __init
@@ -447,7 +505,7 @@ int __init acpi_numa_init(void)/* SRAT: System Resource Affinity Table */ if (!acpi_table_parse (ACPI_SIG_SRAT , acpi_parse_srat)) { -struct acpi_subtable_proc srat_proc[3 ]; +struct acpi_subtable_proc srat_proc[4 ];memset (srat_proc,0 ,sizeof (srat_proc)); srat_proc[0 ].id =ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_CPU_AFFINITY ;
@@ -456,6 +514,8 @@ int __init acpi_numa_init(void) srat_proc[1 ].handler = acpi_parse_x2apic_affinity; srat_proc[2 ].id =ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_GICC_AFFINITY ; srat_proc[2 ].handler = acpi_parse_gicc_affinity; + srat_proc[3 ].id =ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_GENERIC_AFFINITY ; + srat_proc[3 ].handler = acpi_parse_gi_affinity; acpi_table_parse_entries_array(ACPI_SIG_SRAT, sizeof(struct acpi_table_srat),
drivers/base/node.c +3 -0
@@ -634,6 +634,8 @@ static struct node_attr node_state_attr[] = { #endif [N_MEMORY] = _NODE_ATTR(has_memory, N_MEMORY), [N_CPU] = _NODE_ATTR(has_cpu, N_CPU), + [N_GENERIC_INITIATOR ] =_NODE_ATTR (has_generic_initiator, + N_GENERIC_INITIATOR), };static struct attribute *node_state_attrs[] = {
@@ -645,6 +647,7 @@ static struct attribute *node_state_attrs[] = {#endif &node_state_attr[N_MEMORY ].attr.attr, &node_state_attr[N_CPU ].attr.attr, + &node_state_attr[N_GENERIC_INITIATOR ].attr.attr, NULL };
include/asm-generic/topology.h +3 -0
@@ -71,6 +71,9 @@#ifndef set_cpu_numa_mem#define set_cpu_numa_mem (cpu, node)#endif +#ifndef set_gi_numa_mem +#define set_gi_numa_mem (gi, node) +#endif #endif /* !CONFIG_NUMA || !CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES */
include/linux/nodemask.h +1 -0
@@ -399,6 +399,7 @@ enum node_states {#endif N_MEMORY ,/* The node has memory(regular, high, movable) */ N_CPU ,/* The node has one or more cpus */ +N_GENERIC_INITIATOR ,/* The node is a GI only node */ NR_NODE_STATES };
include/linux/topology.h +7 -0
@@ -125,6 +125,13 @@ static inline void set_numa_mem(int node) }#endif +#ifndef set_gi_numa_mem +static inline void set_gi_numa_mem (int gi,int node) +{ + _node_numa_mem_[gi] = node; +} +#endif +#ifndef node_to_mem_nodestatic inline int node_to_mem_node (int node) {
Signature · 1 line
2.19.1
PATCH v3 2/4 arm64: Support Generic Initiator only domains
In reply to Jonathan CameronThe one thing that currently needs doing from an architecture point of view is associating the GI domain with its nearest memory domain. This allows all the standard NUMA aware code to get a 'reasonable' answer.
A clever driver might elect to do load balancing etc if there are multiple host / memory domains nearby, but that's a decision for the driver.
--- arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c +8 -0
@@ -731,6 +731,7 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus) {int err;unsigned int cpu; +unsigned int node;unsigned int this_cpu;init_cpu_topology ();
@@ -769,6 +770,13 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)set_cpu_present (cpu, true);numa_store_cpu_info (cpu); } + +/* +* Walk the numa domains and set the node to numa memory reference +* for any that are Generic Initiator Only. +*/ +for_each_node_state (node,N_GENERIC_INITIATOR ) +set_gi_numa_mem (node,local_memory_node (node)); }void (*__smp_cross_call)(const struct cpumask *,unsigned int );
Signature · 1 line
2.19.1
PATCH v3 3/4 x86: Support Generic Initiator only proximity domains
In reply to Jonathan CameronDone in a somewhat different fashion to arm64. Here the infrastructure for memoryless domains was already in place. That infrastruture applies just as well to domains that also don't have a CPU, hence it works for Generic Initiator Domains.
In common with memoryless domains we only register GI domains if the proximity node is not online. If a domain is already a memory containing domain, or a memoryless domain there is nothing to do just because it also contains a Generic Initiator.
--- arch/x86/include/asm/numa.h | 2 ++ arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 1 + arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+)
arch/x86/include/asm/numa.h +2 -0
@@ -62,12 +62,14 @@ extern void numa_clear_node(int cpu);extern void __init init_cpu_to_node (void );extern void numa_add_cpu (int cpu);extern void numa_remove_cpu (int cpu); +extern void init_gi_nodes (void );#else /* CONFIG_NUMA */ static inline void numa_set_node (int cpu,int node) { }static inline void numa_clear_node (int cpu) { }static inline void init_cpu_to_node (void ) { }static inline void numa_add_cpu (int cpu) { }static inline void numa_remove_cpu (int cpu) { } +static inline void init_gi_nodes (void ) { }#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA */ #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS
arch/x86/kernel/setup.c +1 -0
@@ -1245,6 +1245,7 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)prefill_possible_map ();init_cpu_to_node (); +init_gi_nodes ();io_apic_init_mappings ();
arch/x86/mm/numa.c +14 -0
@@ -732,6 +732,20 @@ static void __init init_memory_less_node(int nid)*/ } +/* +* Generic Initiator Nodes may have neither CPU nor Memory. +* At this stage if either of the others were present we would +* already be online. +*/ +void __init init_gi_nodes (void ) +{ +int nid; + +for_each_node_state (nid,N_GENERIC_INITIATOR ) +if (!node_online (nid)) +init_memory_less_node (nid); +} +/* * Setup early cpu_to_node. *
Signature · 1 line
2.19.1
PATCH v3 4/4 ACPI: Let ACPI know we support Generic Initiator Affinity Structures
In reply to Jonathan CameronUntil we tell ACPI that we support generic initiators, it will have to operate in fall back domain mode and all _PXM entries should be on existing non GI domains.
This patch sets the relevant OSC bit to make that happen.
Note that this currently doesn't take into account whether we have the relevant setup code for a given architecture. Do we want to make this optional, or should the initial patch set just enable it for all ACPI supporting architectures?
--- drivers/acpi/bus.c | 1 + include/linux/acpi.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
drivers/acpi/bus.c +1 -0
@@ -315,6 +315,7 @@ static void acpi_bus_osc_support(void) capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD ] |=OSC_SB_HOTPLUG_OST_SUPPORT ; capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD ] |=OSC_SB_PCLPI_SUPPORT ; + capbuf[OSC_SUPPORT_DWORD ] |=OSC_SB_GENERIC_INITIATOR_SUPPORT ;#ifdef CONFIG_X86 if (boot_cpu_has (X86_FEATURE_HWP )) {
include/linux/acpi.h +1 -0
@@ -503,6 +503,7 @@ acpi_status acpi_run_osc(acpi_handle handle, struct acpi_osc_context *context);#define OSC_SB_PCLPI_SUPPORT 0x00000080#define OSC_SB_OSLPI_SUPPORT 0x00000100#define OSC_SB_CPC_DIVERSE_HIGH_SUPPORT 0x00001000 +#define OSC_SB_GENERIC_INITIATOR_SUPPORT 0x00002000extern bool osc_sb_apei_support_acked;extern bool osc_pc_lpi_support_confirmed;
Signature · 1 line
2.19.1
Hi All,
Anyone had a change to take a look at this?
Thanks,
Jonathan
Quoted 88 lines · On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 01:49:03 +0800 Jonathan Cameron…
Changes since RFC V2.
* RFC dropped as now we have x86 support, so the lack of guards in in the ACPI code etc should now be fine.
* Added x86 support. Note this has only been tested on QEMU as I don't have a convenient x86 NUMA machine to play with. Note that this fitted together rather differently form arm64 so I'm particularly interested in feedback on the two solutions.Since RFC V1.
* Fix incorrect interpretation of the ACPI entry noted by Keith Busch
* Use the acpica headers definitions that are now in mmotm.It's worth noting that, to safely put a given device in a GI node, may require changes to the existing drivers as it's not unusual to assume you have local memory or processor core. There may be futher constraints not yet covered by this patch.
Original cover letter...
ACPI 6.3 introduced a new entity that can be part of a NUMA proximity domain. It may share such a domain with the existing options (memory, cpu etc) but it may also exist on it's own.
The intent is to allow the description of the NUMA properties (particulary via HMAT) of accelerators and other initiators of memory activity that are not the host processor running the operating system.
This patch set introduces 'just enough' to make them work for arm64 and x86. It should be trivial to support other architectures, I just don't suitable NUMA systems readily available to test.
There are a few quirks that need to be considered.
1. Fall back nodes
******************As pre ACPI 6.3 supporting operating systems do not have Generic Initiator Proximity Domains it is possible to specify, via
_PXMin DSDT that another device is part of such a GI only node. This currently blows up spectacularly.Whilst we can obviously 'now' protect against such a situation (see the related thread on PCI
_PXMsupport and the threadripper board identified there as also falling into the problem of using non existent nodes
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10723311/ ), there is no way to be sure we will never have legacy OSes that are not protected against this. It would also be 'non ideal' to fallback to a default node as there may be a better (non GI) node to pick if GI nodes aren't available.The work around is that we also have a new system wide OSC bit that allows an operating system to 'annouce' that it supports Generic Initiators. This allows, the firmware to us DSDT magic to 'move' devices between the nodes dependent on whether our new nodes are there or not.
2. New ways of assigning a proximity domain for devices
*******************************************************Until now, the only way firmware could indicate that a particular device (outside the 'special' set of cpus etc) was to be found in a particular Proximity Domain by the use of
_PXMin DSDT.That is equally valid with GI domains, but we have new options. The SRAT affinity structure includes a handle (ACPI or PCI) to identify devices with the system and specify their proximity domain that way. If both
_PXMand this are provided, they should give the same answer.For now this patch set completely ignores that feature as we don't need it to start the discussion. It will form a follow up set at some point (if no one else fancies doing it).
Jonathan Cameron (4):
ACPI: Support Generic Initiator only domains
arm64: Support Generic Initiator only domains
x86: Support Generic Initiator only proximity domains
ACPI: Let ACPI know we support Generic Initiator Affinity Structuresarch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 8 +++++ arch/x86/include/asm/numa.h | 2 ++ arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 1 + arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 14 ++++++++ drivers/acpi/bus.c | 1 + drivers/acpi/numa.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/base/node.c | 3 ++ include/asm-generic/topology.h | 3 ++ include/linux/acpi.h | 1 + include/linux/nodemask.h | 1 + include/linux/topology.h | 7 ++++ 11 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
On Tue, 28 May 2019 12:31:58 +0100
Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi All,
This is your periodic Generic Initiator reminder service. I'm still looking for review on all aspects of this series.
* ACPI for the table parsing code.
* ARM64 for the architecture handling
* x86 for the architecture handling.
* Generic MM for the overall approach. In some sense it's not mm related in of itself (as otherwise they wouldn't be Generic Initiator domains) but it does result in different NUMA policy decisions from the current status hence mm input would be great.
Any suggestions on people to add to the CC list to try and make some progress on this welcome as well.
If I don't hear anything I'll do a rebase post the coming merge window and resend.
Thanks,
Jonathan
Quoted 106 lines
Hi All,
Anyone had a change to take a look at this?
Thanks,
Jonathan
Quoted 75 lines · On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 01:49:03 +0800 Jonathan Cameron…
Changes since RFC V2.
* RFC dropped as now we have x86 support, so the lack of guards in in the ACPI code etc should now be fine.
* Added x86 support. Note this has only been tested on QEMU as I don't have a convenient x86 NUMA machine to play with. Note that this fitted together rather differently form arm64 so I'm particularly interested in feedback on the two solutions.Since RFC V1.
* Fix incorrect interpretation of the ACPI entry noted by Keith Busch
* Use the acpica headers definitions that are now in mmotm.It's worth noting that, to safely put a given device in a GI node, may require changes to the existing drivers as it's not unusual to assume you have local memory or processor core. There may be futher constraints not yet covered by this patch.
Original cover letter...
ACPI 6.3 introduced a new entity that can be part of a NUMA proximity domain. It may share such a domain with the existing options (memory, cpu etc) but it may also exist on it's own.
The intent is to allow the description of the NUMA properties (particulary via HMAT) of accelerators and other initiators of memory activity that are not the host processor running the operating system.
This patch set introduces 'just enough' to make them work for arm64 and x86. It should be trivial to support other architectures, I just don't suitable NUMA systems readily available to test.
There are a few quirks that need to be considered.
1. Fall back nodes
******************As pre ACPI 6.3 supporting operating systems do not have Generic Initiator Proximity Domains it is possible to specify, via
_PXMin DSDT that another device is part of such a GI only node. This currently blows up spectacularly.Whilst we can obviously 'now' protect against such a situation (see the related thread on PCI
_PXMsupport and the threadripper board identified there as also falling into the problem of using non existent nodes
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10723311/ ), there is no way to be sure we will never have legacy OSes that are not protected against this. It would also be 'non ideal' to fallback to a default node as there may be a better (non GI) node to pick if GI nodes aren't available.The work around is that we also have a new system wide OSC bit that allows an operating system to 'annouce' that it supports Generic Initiators. This allows, the firmware to us DSDT magic to 'move' devices between the nodes dependent on whether our new nodes are there or not.
2. New ways of assigning a proximity domain for devices
*******************************************************Until now, the only way firmware could indicate that a particular device (outside the 'special' set of cpus etc) was to be found in a particular Proximity Domain by the use of
_PXMin DSDT.That is equally valid with GI domains, but we have new options. The SRAT affinity structure includes a handle (ACPI or PCI) to identify devices with the system and specify their proximity domain that way. If both
_PXMand this are provided, they should give the same answer.For now this patch set completely ignores that feature as we don't need it to start the discussion. It will form a follow up set at some point (if no one else fancies doing it).
Jonathan Cameron (4):
ACPI: Support Generic Initiator only domains
arm64: Support Generic Initiator only domains
x86: Support Generic Initiator only proximity domains
ACPI: Let ACPI know we support Generic Initiator Affinity StructuresQuoted 13 lines
arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 8 +++++ arch/x86/include/asm/numa.h | 2 ++ arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 1 + arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 14 ++++++++ drivers/acpi/bus.c | 1 + drivers/acpi/numa.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/base/node.c | 3 ++ include/asm-generic/topology.h | 3 ++ include/linux/acpi.h | 1 + include/linux/nodemask.h | 1 + include/linux/topology.h | 7 ++++ 11 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel