Re: [PATCH 4/5] powerpc/smp: add cpu_cache_mask

2017-03-27 Thread Michael Ellerman
Oliver O'Halloran writes: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:26 PM, Michael Ellerman > wrote: >> Oliver O'Halloran writes: >> >>> Traditionally we have only ever tracked which CPUs are in the same core >>> (cpu_sibling_mask) and on the same

Re: [PATCH 4/5] powerpc/smp: add cpu_cache_mask

2017-03-22 Thread Oliver O'Halloran
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:26 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Oliver O'Halloran writes: > >> Traditionally we have only ever tracked which CPUs are in the same core >> (cpu_sibling_mask) and on the same die (cpu_core_mask). For Power9 we >> need to be aware

Re: [PATCH 4/5] powerpc/smp: add cpu_cache_mask

2017-03-15 Thread Michael Ellerman
Oliver O'Halloran writes: > Traditionally we have only ever tracked which CPUs are in the same core > (cpu_sibling_mask) and on the same die (cpu_core_mask). For Power9 we > need to be aware of which CPUs share cache with each other so this patch > adds cpu_cache_mask and the

[PATCH 4/5] powerpc/smp: add cpu_cache_mask

2017-03-01 Thread Oliver O'Halloran
Traditionally we have only ever tracked which CPUs are in the same core (cpu_sibling_mask) and on the same die (cpu_core_mask). For Power9 we need to be aware of which CPUs share cache with each other so this patch adds cpu_cache_mask and the underlying cpu_cache_map variable to track this.