From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:13:19 +0100 Subject: [PATCHv3 1/9] arm: perf: factor arm_pmu core out to drivers In-Reply-To: <1436181842-19402-2-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> References: <1436181842-19402-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> <1436181842-19402-2-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com> Message-ID: <20150720161318.GK9908@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Mark, On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 12:23:53PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > To enable sharing of the arm_pmu code with arm64, this patch factors it > out to drivers/perf/. A new drivers/perf directory is added for > performance monitor drivers to live under. > > MAINTAINERS is updated accordingly. Files added previously without a > corresponsing MAINTAINERS update (perf_regs.c, perf_callchain.c, and > perf_event.h) are also added. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman > Cc: Ingo Molnar > Cc: Linus Walleij > Cc: Paul Mackerras > Cc: Peter Zijlstra > Cc: Russell King > Cc: Will Deacon > --- > MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++-- > arch/arm/Kconfig | 8 ++------ > arch/arm/kernel/Makefile | 3 +-- > arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v6.c | 2 +- > arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c | 2 +- > arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_xscale.c | 2 +- > arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpu-db8500.c | 2 +- > drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++ > drivers/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/perf/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++ > drivers/perf/Makefile | 1 + > arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c => drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c | 2 +- > arch/arm/include/asm/pmu.h => include/linux/perf/arm_pmu.h | 4 ++-- > 13 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 drivers/perf/Kconfig > create mode 100644 drivers/perf/Makefile > rename arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c => drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c (99%) > rename arch/arm/include/asm/pmu.h => include/linux/perf/arm_pmu.h (98%) I'd like to take this for 4.3 on top of my current queue of ARM perf updates. I've put together a branch, but it's not clear which tree this should go through. Russell: would you be ok taking this via the ARM tree, or would you prefer it if I sent this via arm-soc? Personally, I think it makes sense to send it to you along with the usual updates, but I appreciate you don't normally touch drivers/ directly like this. Will