From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd) Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 17:04:23 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 0/2] genirq: arm64: perf: support for percpu pmu interrupt In-Reply-To: <1383739658-10036-1-git-send-email-vkale@apm.com> References: <1383739658-10036-1-git-send-email-vkale@apm.com> Message-ID: <527D8A17.9020208@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 11/06/13 04:07, Vinayak Kale wrote: > This patch series adds support to handle interrupt registration/deregistration > in arm64 pmu driver when pmu interrupt type is percpu. > > Patches in this patch series were previously sent out as separate patches [1]. > This patch series incorporates comments/fixes suggested for original patches. > > [1] > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-October/205888.html > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-October/204414.html > > Vinayak Kale (2): > genirq: error reporting in request_percpu_irq() and > request_threaded_irq() > arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt > > arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > kernel/irq/manage.c | 12 +++-- > 2 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) > What ever happened to the approach here[1]? It doesn't look very nice to have to request the irq first as a per-cpu interrupt and then try as a non-percpu interrupt when genirq already knows if its per-cpu or not. [1] http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1207.3/02955.html -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758016Ab3KIBE0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 20:04:26 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.11.231]:57989 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757268Ab3KIBEZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 20:04:25 -0500 Message-ID: <527D8A17.9020208@codeaurora.org> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 17:04:23 -0800 From: Stephen Boyd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vinayak Kale , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org CC: patches@apm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, will.deacon@arm.com, jcm@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] genirq: arm64: perf: support for percpu pmu interrupt References: <1383739658-10036-1-git-send-email-vkale@apm.com> In-Reply-To: <1383739658-10036-1-git-send-email-vkale@apm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/06/13 04:07, Vinayak Kale wrote: > This patch series adds support to handle interrupt registration/deregistration > in arm64 pmu driver when pmu interrupt type is percpu. > > Patches in this patch series were previously sent out as separate patches [1]. > This patch series incorporates comments/fixes suggested for original patches. > > [1] > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-October/205888.html > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-October/204414.html > > Vinayak Kale (2): > genirq: error reporting in request_percpu_irq() and > request_threaded_irq() > arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt > > arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > kernel/irq/manage.c | 12 +++-- > 2 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) > What ever happened to the approach here[1]? It doesn't look very nice to have to request the irq first as a per-cpu interrupt and then try as a non-percpu interrupt when genirq already knows if its per-cpu or not. [1] http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1207.3/02955.html -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation