Re: [PATCH v2] arch_topology: Introduce nr_possible_packages
Feng Tang <[email protected]> Wed, 22 Jul 2026 14:50:48 +0800
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.driver-core,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 03:32:03PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 01:43:17PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote: > > For multi-sockets platforms kernel or driver code may need the number > > of packages to chose different code directions. Some architecture > > already provides such kind of interface like x86, which is being used > > in its architecture code and drivers. > > > > Add similar interface 'nr_possible_packages' for platforms which can > > get package topology information by parsing ACPI tables in boot phase, > > which was verified to show the correct number of packages on some > > 1-socket and 2-sockets production arm64 servers from different vendors. > > > > It has been used locally by some arm64 PMU driver, and cross-socket > > timer-consistency check code, which are to be posted. > > > > Signed-off-by: Feng Tang <[email protected]> > > --- > > since v1: > > * fix the potential overflow issue for 32b package ID (Sudeep) > > * add real use case in commit log (Sudeep) > > > > since RFC: > > * use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL instead of EXPORT_SYMBOL (Greg) > > This is undone in this version, why ? > > > * change the possible max package ID to 2047 (Greg) > > * remove the CONFIG_ARM64/RISCV limit for 'nr_possible_packages' (Greg) > > Again this is still there, misleading or v2 is back to RFC, /me confused. Thanks for the review! My fault! that I messed up with the locally saved RFC and V1 patch. I was focusing on fixing the problems you mentioned. > > > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/ > > Comments about users is still ignored. I described the user case in commit log of this version. It was locally used by several drivers and other code, maybe I should repost it together with those code. btw, is there any problem with the new package accounting code? Thanks, Feng > -- > Regards, > Sudeep > > P.S.: Please avoid personal pings as it will not gain attention from other > interested parties.