From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
punit.agrawal@arm.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
mlangsdorf@redhat.com, steve.capper@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 07/10] arm: arm64: pmu: Assign platform PMU CPU affinity
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 16:48:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160916154838.GA18914@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8d76725a-507b-4d70-8aad-993ccfa488f6@arm.com>
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:35:32AM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> On 09/16/2016 08:29 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 05:32:35PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> >>On systems with multiple PMU types the PMU to CPU affinity
> >>needs to be detected and set. The CPU to interrupt affinity
> >>should also be set.
> >>
> (trimming)
> >> continue;
> >> ret = info->init(pmu);
> >>+ /*
> >>+ * if this pmu declaration is unspecified and we have
> >>+ * previously found a PMU on this platform then append
> >>+ * a PMU number to the pmu name. This avoids changing
> >>+ * the names of PMUs that are specific to a class of CPUs.
> >>+ * The assumption is that if we match a specific PMU in the
> >>+ * provided pmu_probe_info then it's unique, and another PMU
> >>+ * in the system will match a different entry rather than
> >>+ * needing the _number to assure its unique.
> >>+ */
> >>+ if ((!info->cpuid) && (duplicate_pmus)) {
> >
> >Hmm, the duplicate_pmus check looks a little odd here. Doesn't it mean
> >that you'd end up with things like:
> >
> >"arm,armv8-pmuv3"
> >"arm,armv8-pmuv3_1"
> >
> >which looks needlessly fiddly to parse. Is this intentional?
>
> Well, IIRC, you recommend that format, or maybe I misunderstood. Anyway, per
> the comment I'm trying to assure that legacy platform devices don't
> accidentally get a "_X" appended to their name and break something.
Ah, right, for the old 32-bit platforms that rely on probing, Gotcha.
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v9 07/10] arm: arm64: pmu: Assign platform PMU CPU affinity
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 16:48:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160916154838.GA18914@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8d76725a-507b-4d70-8aad-993ccfa488f6@arm.com>
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:35:32AM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> On 09/16/2016 08:29 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 05:32:35PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> >>On systems with multiple PMU types the PMU to CPU affinity
> >>needs to be detected and set. The CPU to interrupt affinity
> >>should also be set.
> >>
> (trimming)
> >> continue;
> >> ret = info->init(pmu);
> >>+ /*
> >>+ * if this pmu declaration is unspecified and we have
> >>+ * previously found a PMU on this platform then append
> >>+ * a PMU number to the pmu name. This avoids changing
> >>+ * the names of PMUs that are specific to a class of CPUs.
> >>+ * The assumption is that if we match a specific PMU in the
> >>+ * provided pmu_probe_info then it's unique, and another PMU
> >>+ * in the system will match a different entry rather than
> >>+ * needing the _number to assure its unique.
> >>+ */
> >>+ if ((!info->cpuid) && (duplicate_pmus)) {
> >
> >Hmm, the duplicate_pmus check looks a little odd here. Doesn't it mean
> >that you'd end up with things like:
> >
> >"arm,armv8-pmuv3"
> >"arm,armv8-pmuv3_1"
> >
> >which looks needlessly fiddly to parse. Is this intentional?
>
> Well, IIRC, you recommend that format, or maybe I misunderstood. Anyway, per
> the comment I'm trying to assure that legacy platform devices don't
> accidentally get a "_X" appended to their name and break something.
Ah, right, for the old 32-bit platforms that rely on probing, Gotcha.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-16 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-14 22:32 [PATCH v9 00/10] Enable PMUs in ACPI systems Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 01/10] arm64: pmu: add fallback probe table Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 02/10] arm64: pmu: Probe default hw/cache counters Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 03/10] arm64: pmu: Hoist pmu platform device name Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 04/10] arm64: Rename the common MADT parse routine Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 05/10] arm: arm64: Add routine to determine cpuid of other cpus Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 06/10] arm64: pmu: Cache PMU interrupt numbers from MADT parse Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 07/10] arm: arm64: pmu: Assign platform PMU CPU affinity Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-16 13:29 ` Will Deacon
2016-09-16 13:29 ` Will Deacon
2016-09-16 15:35 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-16 15:35 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-16 15:48 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2016-09-16 15:48 ` Will Deacon
2016-09-16 16:37 ` Punit Agrawal
2016-09-16 16:37 ` Punit Agrawal
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 08/10] arm64: pmu: Detect and enable multiple PMUs in an ACPI system Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-16 13:33 ` Punit Agrawal
2016-09-16 13:33 ` Punit Agrawal
2016-09-16 16:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-16 16:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-16 17:07 ` Punit Agrawal
2016-09-16 17:07 ` Punit Agrawal
2016-09-16 17:57 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-16 17:57 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-20 16:11 ` Punit Agrawal
2016-09-20 16:11 ` Punit Agrawal
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 09/10] arm: pmu: Add PMU definitions for hot-plugged CPUs Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` [PATCH v9 10/10] MAINTAINERS: Tweak ARM PMU maintainers Jeremy Linton
2016-09-14 22:32 ` Jeremy Linton
2016-09-16 17:13 ` [PATCH v9 00/10] Enable PMUs in ACPI systems Punit Agrawal
2016-09-16 17:13 ` Punit Agrawal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160916154838.GA18914@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mlangsdorf@redhat.com \
--cc=punit.agrawal@arm.com \
--cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.