All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/5] arm_pmu: acpi: check for mismatched PPIs
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:43:37 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171211184337.GF3275@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171211180830.firkcy3jptw3bou3@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 06:08:31PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 05:37:07PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 02:12:37PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > The arm_pmu platform code explicitly checks for mismatched PPIs at probe
> > > time, while the ACPI code leaves this to the core code. Future
> > > refactoring will make this difficult for the core code to check, so
> > > let's have the ACPI code check this explicitly.
> > > 
> > > As before, upon a failure we'll continue on without an interrupt. Ho
> > > hum.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c      | 16 ++++------------
> > >  drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > >  2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> > > index 3d6d4c5f2356..e0242103d904 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> > > @@ -557,18 +557,10 @@ int armpmu_request_irq(struct arm_pmu *armpmu, int cpu)
> > >  	if (!irq)
> > >  		return 0;
> > >  
> > > -	if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq) && cpumask_empty(&armpmu->active_irqs)) {
> > > -		err = request_percpu_irq(irq, handler, "arm-pmu",
> > > -					 &hw_events->percpu_pmu);
> > > -	} else if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)) {
> > > -		int other_cpu = cpumask_first(&armpmu->active_irqs);
> > > -		int other_irq = per_cpu(hw_events->irq, other_cpu);
> > > -
> > > -		if (irq != other_irq) {
> > > -			pr_warn("mismatched PPIs detected.\n");
> > > -			err = -EINVAL;
> > > -			goto err_out;
> > > -		}
> > > +	if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)) {
> > > +		if (cpumask_empty(&armpmu->active_irqs))
> > 
> > Why not leave this as before, with a '&&' operator?
> 
> Because then we'd fall into the else case (for SPIs), were the
> active_irqs mask empty.
> 
> Previously, that would have been caught by the irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)
> case that got removed.
> 
> I can instead make this:
> 
> 	if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq) && cpumask_empty(&armpmu->active_irqs)) {
> 		err = request_percpu_irq(irq, handler, "arm-pmu",
> 					 &hw_events->percpu_pmu);
> 	} else if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)) {
> 		/* nothing to do */
> 	} else  { 
> 		< SPI case >
> 	}
> 
> ... but that seemed more painful to read.

Yeah, that's crazy :)

How about:

  if (!irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)) {
	/* SPI case */
  } else if (cpumask_empty(&armpmu->active_irqs)) {
	/* PPI case */
  }

?

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-11 18:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-01 14:12 [PATCH 0/5] arm_pmu: fix lockdep issues with ACPI systems Mark Rutland
2017-11-01 14:12 ` [PATCH 1/5] arm_pmu: fold platform helpers into platform code Mark Rutland
2017-11-01 14:12 ` [PATCH 2/5] arm_pmu: have armpmu_alloc() take GFP flags Mark Rutland
2017-12-06  6:54   ` Zhangshaokun
2017-12-11 17:37   ` Will Deacon
2017-12-11 18:02     ` Mark Rutland
2017-11-01 14:12 ` [PATCH 3/5] arm_pmu: acpi: check for mismatched PPIs Mark Rutland
2017-12-11 17:37   ` Will Deacon
2017-12-11 18:08     ` Mark Rutland
2017-12-11 18:43       ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-11-01 14:12 ` [PATCH 4/5] arm_pmu: note IRQs/PMUs per-cpu Mark Rutland
2017-12-11 17:36   ` Will Deacon
2017-12-11 18:15     ` Mark Rutland
2017-11-01 14:12 ` [PATCH 5/5] arm_pmu: acpi: request IRQs up-front Mark Rutland
2017-12-11 17:36   ` Will Deacon
2017-12-11 17:55     ` Mark Rutland
2017-12-11 18:45       ` Will Deacon
2017-11-01 17:02 ` [PATCH 0/5] arm_pmu: fix lockdep issues with ACPI systems Tyler Baicar
2017-12-11 17:38 ` Will Deacon

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=20171211184337.GF3275@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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.