From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4D7BC04A6B for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 16:45:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E3D216F4 for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 16:45:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727803AbfEHQpP (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 May 2019 12:45:15 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:40336 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727560AbfEHQpP (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 May 2019 12:45:15 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CE71374; Wed, 8 May 2019 09:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e107155-lin (e107155-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.42]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 55D523F238; Wed, 8 May 2019 09:45:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 17:45:06 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Hanjun Guo Cc: Jeremy Linton , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, linuxarm@huawei.com, john.garry@huawei.com, Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] arm64: SPE ACPI enablement Message-ID: <20190508164506.GA21553@e107155-lin> References: <20190503232407.37195-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <5eaa1607-4bf0-a320-e9cf-2d51eca912c6@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5eaa1607-4bf0-a320-e9cf-2d51eca912c6@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Sat, May 04, 2019 at 07:06:19PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > Hi Jeremy, Mark, > > On 2019/5/4 7:24, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > This patch series enables the Arm Statistical Profiling > > Extension (SPE) on ACPI platforms. > > > > This is possible because ACPI 6.3 uses a previously > > reserved field in the MADT to store the SPE interrupt > > number, similarly to how the normal PMU is described. > > If a consistent valid interrupt exists across all the > > cores in the system, a platform device is registered. > > That then triggers the SPE module, which runs as normal. > > > > We also add the ability to parse the PPTT for IDENTICAL > > cores. We then use this to sanity check the single SPE > > device we create. This creates a bit of a problem with > > respect to the specification though. The specification > > says that its legal for multiple tree's to exist in the > > PPTT. We handle this fine, but what happens in the > > case of multiple tree's is that the lack of a common > > node with IDENTICAL set forces us to assume that there > > are multiple non-IDENTICAL cores in the machine. > > Adding this patch set on top of latest mainline kernel, > and tested on D06 which has the SPE feature, in boot message > shows it was probed successfully: > > arm_spe_pmu arm,spe-v1: probed for CPUs 0-95 [max_record_sz 128, align 4, features 0x7] > > but when I test it with spe events such as > > perf record -c 1024 -e arm_spe_0/branch_filter=0/ -o spe ls > > it fails with: > failed to mmap with 12 (Cannot allocate memory), > > Confirmed that patch [0] is merged and other perf events are working > fine. > > I narrowed this issue down that mmap() failed to alloc 4M memory > in perf tool but seems have no relationship with this SPE patch set, > then I'm lost, could you take look please? > Thanks for pointing this out. I had last tested SPE only with v5.0 and missed completely to check on v5.1. FWIW, I can reproduce this issue on v5.1 -- Regards, Sudeep