Hi All,
This one made it onto the list of topics to discuss (now marked as no need
to discuss). I've been meaning to give a status update by email including
what is outstanding here. Please let me know if this fails to cover
some aspect of interest.
Background:
https://github.com/hisilicon/acpi-numa-whitepaper/releases/tag/v0.93 chapter 3.
Generic initiators are a concept in ACPI 6.3 (sec 5.2.16.6) to plug a hole
in the definition of proximity domains.
Proximity domains in ACPI (NUMA nodes in kernel) are defined by entries in SRAT
table. There are a whole range of different types of SRAT entry but before
ACPI 6.3 this more or less in practice meant that a proximity domain only
existed if it contained either (or both) memory and CPUs. Other initiators
of memory transactions such as network cards can be assigned to an existing
proximity domain via _PXM in ACPI DSDT. This restricted them to sharing a domain
with either memory or processors.
That doesn't always reflect system architecture, particularly with the addition
of richer descriptions of access characteristics (latency / bandwidth) brought
in by HMAT. Hence Generic Initiator domains to allow you to specify a
proximity domain with some other type of device in it (such as a network card)
and get all of the descriptive capability available for CPU / memory nodes.
Note that this was brought in prior to CXL becoming public but 1.1 CXL spec
states that initiators on CXL should be described using Generic Initiator nodes.
This should accelerate the number of users of this feature considerably.
It is also useful in some existing systems.
What support was needed in kernel:
1) Parsing of the SRAT Generic Initiator Affinity Structure
2) Instantiating the NUMA nodes that map to the GI PXM nodes to ensure stuff
like fallback lists for memory allocation work as normal.
3) Richer use of HMAT access characteristics to differentiate nearest CPU
to memory from nearest initiator to memory.
4) PXM assignment from the SRAT record rather than _PXM (not yet done).
5) PCI PXM assignment (not yet done)
Status:
The kernel patches sat on the list (with rebases) for well over a year
failing to get the architecture review needed (as there was significant
risk of breakage in both ARM64 and x86). It was to break this blockage
that we were interested in an open discussion on this. However, they did
recently get x86 review this and Rafael queued them for 5.10 (now merged)
The PCI PXM issue has been long standing due to some buggy firmware
on certain X86 boards and the need for a clarification in the ACPI spec
(added in 6.3). To make this safe, needed to ensure that NUMA nodes on
ACPI systems can only be instantiated during the main parse of SRAT.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200818142430.1156547-1-Jonathan.Cameron@…
That fix is now in place, and we'll resend the PCI fix shortly.
Note it may be "interesting" to support nodes from CXL CDAT tables at runtime
but that is another topic.
( https://uefi.org/node/4093https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cxl/20201102183428.00005f4f@Huawei.com/T/#m52… )
For a Generic Initiator Nodes, there are two ways a device an be assigned
to the proximity domain. Conventional _PXM in DSDT can be used and
that is now supported. The SRAT entry itself also contains an address
(PCI seg + BDF or Platform UID / HID based). There is no obligation to
provide both. The SRAT based method will require some level of alternative
infrastructure to that used for _PXM. We may look at this at some stage.
So a few outstanding things but probably not worth discussing on a call
at this stage unless anyone is seeing problems with the stuff already merged.
Thanks,
Jonathan
Topic: Linaro Open Discussions [1] - Kernel related
Time: Nov 4, 2020 02:00 PM London
------
Agenda [2]
- Hanjun/Shameer - IORT reserved memory support
- Zhangfei/Wangzhou - SVA support for SMMU stall mode
- Hanjun - Uncore DVFS and how to support it (needs spec update, either
ARM specs or ACPI)
[1] Linaro Open Discussions Home
<https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home>
For all open meeting schedules
[2] 2020-11-04 Proposed Meeting Agenda
<https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/2020-11-04+Proposed+Meeting+Meet…>
----------
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/98027304997
Meeting ID: 980 2730 4997
One tap mobile
+16699009128,,98027304997# US (San Jose)
+12532158782,,98027304997# US (Tacoma)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 980 2730 4997
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aehAhwidV2
--
Mike Holmes | Director, Foundation Technologies, Linaro
Mike.Holmes(a)linaro.org <mike.holmes(a)linaro.org>
"Work should be fun and collaborative, the rest follows"
Hi all,
In the Linux kernel v5.6, we introduced the basic support for PSCI
OS-initiated mode. Linaro is still working on evolving the support,
step by step. Additionally, we are helping some of our members with
corresponding SoC deployment, which is planned to continue for a
while.
Basically, the PSCI OS-initiated mode allows Linux to be in charge of
idlestate decisions for a group of CPUs (aka CPU cluster), which may
share idlestates. In some cases this enables improvements in regards
to performance/energy, but could also be used to help manage resources
that may share power-/clock-domains with CPUs.
Moving forward, we are now planning to extend the corresponding PSCI
implementation in the Trusted Firmware-A (TF-A) with the OS-initiated
mode, together with our members and member engineers. Currently, only
the default PSCI platform-coordinated mode is supported by the TF-A.
We seek for additional collaborations and input to the new project!
Please get in touch, if you have any feedback and/or find this project
interesting.
Finally, a kickoff meeting is about to be scheduled and held within a
few weeks. Let me know if you want to join the discussions.
Kind regards
Ulf Hansson, Linaro Kernel Working Group
Hi Lorenzo,
On 2020/10/22 1:26, Lorenzo Pieralisi via Linaro-open-discussions wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> according to the topics posted previously on the list, I suggest we
> tackle the following ones on Nov 4th (all topics posted are interesting
> but some require some time to elaborate following KVM forum next week):
>
> - Hanjun/Shameer - IORT reserved memory support
> - Zhangfei/Wangzhou - SVA support for SMMU stall mode
> - Hanjun - Uncore DVFS and how to support it (needs spec update, either
> ARM specs or ACPI)
>
> On MPAM - I don't think we require a topic for status update - technical
> discussions are already on ML and I don't think there is much to be
> done to speed up upstreaming other than following the usual process.
>
> Please let me know your thoughts.
Is fine to me to remove the MPAM topic.
Thanks
Hanjun
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:26, Lorenzo Pieralisi via
Linaro-open-discussions <linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org>
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> according to the topics posted previously on the list, I suggest we
> tackle the following ones on Nov 4th (all topics posted are interesting
> but some require some time to elaborate following KVM forum next week):
>
> - Hanjun/Shameer - IORT reserved memory support
> - Zhangfei/Wangzhou - SVA support for SMMU stall mode
> - Hanjun - Uncore DVFS and how to support it (needs spec update, either
> ARM specs or ACPI)
>
> On MPAM - I don't think we require a topic for status update - technical
> discussions are already on ML and I don't think there is much to be
> done to speed up upstreaming other than following the usual process.
>
> Please let me know your thoughts.
Your proposal looks good to me
Limiting to 3 topics for an hour meeting is probably a good thing to
allow discussion
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Lorenzo
> --
> Linaro-open-discussions mailing list
> https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home
> https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions
I have updated the agenda to reflect the topics discussion
https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/2020-11-04+Proposed+Meeting+Meet…
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 6:45 AM Hanjun Guo via Linaro-open-discussions <
linaro-open-discussions(a)op-lists.linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> On 2020/10/22 1:26, Lorenzo Pieralisi via Linaro-open-discussions wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > according to the topics posted previously on the list, I suggest we
> > tackle the following ones on Nov 4th (all topics posted are interesting
> > but some require some time to elaborate following KVM forum next week):
> >
> > - Hanjun/Shameer - IORT reserved memory support
> > - Zhangfei/Wangzhou - SVA support for SMMU stall mode
> > - Hanjun - Uncore DVFS and how to support it (needs spec update, either
> > ARM specs or ACPI)
> >
> > On MPAM - I don't think we require a topic for status update - technical
> > discussions are already on ML and I don't think there is much to be
> > done to speed up upstreaming other than following the usual process.
> >
> > Please let me know your thoughts.
>
> Is fine to me to remove the MPAM topic.
>
> Thanks
> Hanjun
> --
> Linaro-open-discussions mailing list
> https://collaborate.linaro.org/display/LOD/Linaro+Open+Discussions+Home
> https://op-lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-open-discussions
>
--
Mike Holmes | Director, Foundation Technologies, Linaro
Mike.Holmes(a)linaro.org <mike.holmes(a)linaro.org>
"Work should be fun and collaborative, the rest follows"
Hi,
For those who are interested, we have a LOC (Linaro OP-TEE Contribution)
Monthly Meeting scheduled for October 28th @ 16.00 (UTC+1).
Regards,
Ruchika
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Joakim Bech via OP-TEE <op-tee(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 17:13
Subject: Linaro OP-TEE Contributions meeting October 2020
To: <op-tee(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>, Ilias Apalodimas <
ilias.apalodimas(a)linaro.org>
Hi,
LOC monthly meeting is planned to take place October 28th @ 16.00 (UTC+1).
Connection details can be found in the meeting notes document (link below).
Ilias and Jens will give an introduction to the secure partitions and
StandaloneMM parts in OP-TEE. Other than that feel free to suggest topics
you'd like to discuss (by replying to this email or write it directly in
the meeting notes).
Note that it's UTC+1 since we're moving to winter time in Sweden in a
couple of days from now (previous LOC meetings have been UTC+2).
Meeting details:
---------------
Date/time: Wednesday October 28th(a)16.00 (UTC+1)
https://everytimezone.com/s/9bfdb976
Invitation/connection details: In the meeting notes
Meeting notes: http://bit.ly/loc-notes
Project page: https://www.linaro.org/projects/#LOC
Regards,
Joakim on behalf of the Linaro OP-TEE team
Hi all,
according to the topics posted previously on the list, I suggest we
tackle the following ones on Nov 4th (all topics posted are interesting
but some require some time to elaborate following KVM forum next week):
- Hanjun/Shameer - IORT reserved memory support
- Zhangfei/Wangzhou - SVA support for SMMU stall mode
- Hanjun - Uncore DVFS and how to support it (needs spec update, either
ARM specs or ACPI)
On MPAM - I don't think we require a topic for status update - technical
discussions are already on ML and I don't think there is much to be
done to speed up upstreaming other than following the usual process.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Thank you very much.
Lorenzo