Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-41925-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2024 12:01:14 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
	"mhklinux@outlook.com" <mhklinux@outlook.com>,
	"arjan@linux.intel.com" <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
	"ray.huang@amd.com" <ray.huang@amd.com>,
	"thomas.lendacky@amd.com" <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
	"andrew.cooper3@citrix.com" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	"Sivanich, Dimitri" <dimitri.sivanich@hpe.com>,
	"Tang, Feng" <feng.tang@intel.com>,
	"kan.liang@linux.intel.com" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
	"Mehta, Sohil" <sohil.mehta@intel.com>,
	"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"kprateek.nayak@amd.com" <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	"jgross@suse.com" <jgross@suse.com>,
	"andy@infradead.org" <andy@infradead.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch v2 21/30] x86/cpu/topology: Use topology bitmaps for
 sizing
Message-ID: <e2d18e01-13f3-4ab6-828e-38a191da4fd7@paulmck-laptop>
Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org
References: <20240118123127.055361964@linutronix.de>
 <20240118123649.739960607@linutronix.de>
 <7c8874d971c69fb4c22c1b771983f8d5109a9387.camel@intel.com>
 <87fryjhmjs.ffs@tglx>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <87fryjhmjs.ffs@tglx>

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 09:22:47PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26 2024 at 07:07, Zhang, Rui wrote:
> >> > ?
> >> > +???????cnta = domain_weight(TOPO_PKG_DOMAIN);
> >> > +???????cntb = domain_weight(TOPO_DIE_DOMAIN);
> >> > +???????__max_logical_packages = cnta;
> >> > +???????__max_dies_per_package = 1U << (get_count_order(cntb) - >
> >> > get_count_order(cnta));
> >> > +
> >> > +???????pr_info("Max. logical packages: %3u\n", cnta);
> >> > +???????pr_info("Max. logical dies:???? %3u\n", cntb);
> >> > +???????pr_info("Max. dies per package: %3u\n", >
> >> > __max_dies_per_package);
> >> > +
> >> > +???????cnta = domain_weight(TOPO_CORE_DOMAIN);
> >> > +???????cntb = domain_weight(TOPO_SMT_DOMAIN);
> >> > +???????smp_num_siblings = 1U << (get_count_order(cntb) - >
> >> > get_count_order(cnta));
> >> > +???????pr_info("Max. threads per core: %3u\n", smp_num_siblings);
> >> > +
> >
> > I missed this but Ashok catches it.
> >
> > Say, on my Adlerlake platform, which has 4 Pcores with HT + 8 Ecores,
> > cnta is 12, cntb is 16, and smp_num_siblings is set to 1 erroneously.
> >
> > I think we should use
> > 	smp_num_siblings = DIV_ROUND_UP(cntb, cnta);
> > here.
> 
> Indeed. That's more than obvious.
> 
> > Or even check each core to get the maximum value (in case there are
> > more than 2 siblings in a core some day).
> 
> We want to get rid of HT not make it worse.

Hear, hear!!!  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul