* [PATCH V6 0/2] genirq: arm64: perf: support for percpu pmu interrupt @ 2013-12-02 9:34 Vinayak Kale 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 1/2] genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag Vinayak Kale 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt Vinayak Kale 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-02 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel This patch series adds support to handle interrupt registration/deregistration in arm64 pmu driver when pmu interrupt type is percpu. Changelog: V6: * In arm64 pmu driver: Use macro 'IRQ_TYPE_NONE' while passing irq type value to enable_percpu_irq(). Change 'irqs' etc variables as unsigned, modify the check for 'irqs' inside armpmu_[release/reserve]_hardware(). V5: * In irqdesc.h: Added Chris Smith's sign-off. In arm64 pmu driver: Handle the invalid irq-0 case for platform_get_irq(). V4: * In arm64 pmu driver: Avoid using irq_to_desc() to check validity of irq. V3: * Remove validity check for 'desc' from accessor function in irqdesc.h . Instead, check the irq 'desc' validity in arm64 pmu driver. V2: * To determine whether an IRQ is percpu or not, added an accessor function in irqdesc.h . This approach was used by Chris Smith here[1] for similar changes in arm pmu driver. * In arm64 pmu driver: Got rid of unnecessary pointer typecastings. [1] http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1207.3/02955.html Vinayak Kale (2): genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- include/linux/irqdesc.h | 8 +++ 2 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) -- 1.7.9.5 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH V6 1/2] genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag 2013-12-02 9:34 [PATCH V6 0/2] genirq: arm64: perf: support for percpu pmu interrupt Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-02 9:34 ` Vinayak Kale 2013-12-03 11:27 ` Will Deacon 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt Vinayak Kale 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-02 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel This patch adds an accessor function for IRQ_PER_CPU flag. The accessor function is useful to determine whether an IRQ is percpu or not. This patch is based on an older patch posted by Chris Smith here [1]. There is a minor change w.r.t. Chris's original patch: The accessor function is renamed as 'irq_is_percpu' instead of 'irq_is_per_cpu'. [1]: http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1207.3/02955.html Signed-off-by: Chris Smith <chris.smith@st.com> Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale@apm.com> --- include/linux/irqdesc.h | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/include/linux/irqdesc.h b/include/linux/irqdesc.h index 56fb646..26e2661 100644 --- a/include/linux/irqdesc.h +++ b/include/linux/irqdesc.h @@ -152,6 +152,14 @@ static inline int irq_balancing_disabled(unsigned int irq) return desc->status_use_accessors & IRQ_NO_BALANCING_MASK; } +static inline int irq_is_percpu(unsigned int irq) +{ + struct irq_desc *desc; + + desc = irq_to_desc(irq); + return desc->status_use_accessors & IRQ_PER_CPU; +} + static inline void irq_set_lockdep_class(unsigned int irq, struct lock_class_key *class) { -- 1.7.9.5 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH V6 1/2] genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 1/2] genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-03 11:27 ` Will Deacon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2013-12-03 11:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:34:02AM +0000, Vinayak Kale wrote: > This patch adds an accessor function for IRQ_PER_CPU flag. > The accessor function is useful to determine whether an IRQ is percpu or not. > > This patch is based on an older patch posted by Chris Smith here [1]. > There is a minor change w.r.t. Chris's original patch: The accessor function > is renamed as 'irq_is_percpu' instead of 'irq_is_per_cpu'. > > [1]: http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1207.3/02955.html > > Signed-off-by: Chris Smith <chris.smith@st.com> > Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale@apm.com> > --- > include/linux/irqdesc.h | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/irqdesc.h b/include/linux/irqdesc.h > index 56fb646..26e2661 100644 > --- a/include/linux/irqdesc.h > +++ b/include/linux/irqdesc.h > @@ -152,6 +152,14 @@ static inline int irq_balancing_disabled(unsigned int irq) > return desc->status_use_accessors & IRQ_NO_BALANCING_MASK; > } > > +static inline int irq_is_percpu(unsigned int irq) > +{ > + struct irq_desc *desc; > + > + desc = irq_to_desc(irq); > + return desc->status_use_accessors & IRQ_PER_CPU; > +} > + > static inline void > irq_set_lockdep_class(unsigned int irq, struct lock_class_key *class) > { Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt 2013-12-02 9:34 [PATCH V6 0/2] genirq: arm64: perf: support for percpu pmu interrupt Vinayak Kale 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 1/2] genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-02 9:34 ` Vinayak Kale 2013-12-03 11:30 ` Will Deacon 2013-12-03 13:50 ` Will Deacon 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-02 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel Add support for irq registration when pmu interrupt is percpu. Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale@apm.com> Signed-off-by: Tuan Phan <tphan@apm.com> --- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 86 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c index cea1594..d2d562f 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ #include <linux/bitmap.h> #include <linux/interrupt.h> +#include <linux/irq.h> #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/export.h> #include <linux/perf_event.h> @@ -363,26 +364,61 @@ validate_group(struct perf_event *event) } static void +armpmu_disable_percpu_irq(void *data) +{ + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); + + cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); + disable_percpu_irq(irq); +} + +static void armpmu_release_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) { - int i, irq, irqs; + int irq; + unsigned int i, irqs; struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; irqs = min(pmu_device->num_resources, num_possible_cpus()); + if (!irqs) + return; - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { - if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs)) - continue; - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); - if (irq >= 0) - free_irq(irq, armpmu); + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); + if (irq <= 0) + return; + + if (irq_is_percpu(irq)) { + on_each_cpu(armpmu_disable_percpu_irq, armpmu, 1); + free_percpu_irq(irq, &cpu_hw_events); + } else { + for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { + if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs)) + continue; + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); + if (irq > 0) + free_irq(irq, armpmu); + } } } +static void +armpmu_enable_percpu_irq(void *data) +{ + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); + + enable_percpu_irq(irq, IRQ_TYPE_NONE); + cpumask_set_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); +} + static int armpmu_reserve_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) { - int i, err, irq, irqs; + int err, irq; + unsigned int i, irqs; struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; if (!pmu_device) { @@ -391,39 +427,59 @@ armpmu_reserve_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) } irqs = min(pmu_device->num_resources, num_possible_cpus()); - if (irqs < 1) { + if (!irqs) { pr_err("no irqs for PMUs defined\n"); return -ENODEV; } - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { - err = 0; - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); - if (irq < 0) - continue; + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); + if (irq <= 0) { + pr_err("failed to get valid irq for PMU device\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } - /* - * If we have a single PMU interrupt that we can't shift, - * assume that we're running on a uniprocessor machine and - * continue. Otherwise, continue without this interrupt. - */ - if (irq_set_affinity(irq, cpumask_of(i)) && irqs > 1) { - pr_warning("unable to set irq affinity (irq=%d, cpu=%u)\n", - irq, i); - continue; - } + if (irq_is_percpu(irq)) { + err = request_percpu_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq, + "arm-pmu", &cpu_hw_events); - err = request_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq, - IRQF_NOBALANCING, - "arm-pmu", armpmu); if (err) { - pr_err("unable to request IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n", - irq); + pr_err("unable to request percpu IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n", + irq); armpmu_release_hardware(armpmu); return err; } - cpumask_set_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs); + on_each_cpu(armpmu_enable_percpu_irq, armpmu, 1); + } else { + for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { + err = 0; + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); + if (irq <= 0) + continue; + + /* + * If we have a single PMU interrupt that we can't shift, + * assume that we're running on a uniprocessor machine and + * continue. Otherwise, continue without this interrupt. + */ + if (irq_set_affinity(irq, cpumask_of(i)) && irqs > 1) { + pr_warning("unable to set irq affinity (irq=%d, cpu=%u)\n", + irq, i); + continue; + } + + err = request_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq, + IRQF_NOBALANCING, + "arm-pmu", armpmu); + if (err) { + pr_err("unable to request IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n", + irq); + armpmu_release_hardware(armpmu); + return err; + } + + cpumask_set_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs); + } } return 0; -- 1.7.9.5 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-03 11:30 ` Will Deacon 2013-12-03 11:49 ` Vinayak Kale 2013-12-03 13:50 ` Will Deacon 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2013-12-03 11:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:34:03AM +0000, Vinayak Kale wrote: > Add support for irq registration when pmu interrupt is percpu. > > Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale@apm.com> > Signed-off-by: Tuan Phan <tphan@apm.com> > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 86 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > index cea1594..d2d562f 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ > > #include <linux/bitmap.h> > #include <linux/interrupt.h> > +#include <linux/irq.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/export.h> > #include <linux/perf_event.h> > @@ -363,26 +364,61 @@ validate_group(struct perf_event *event) > } > > static void > +armpmu_disable_percpu_irq(void *data) > +{ > + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; > + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; > + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); > + > + cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); > + disable_percpu_irq(irq); > +} > + > +static void > armpmu_release_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) > { > - int i, irq, irqs; > + int irq; Why did you not make this unsigned, like I suggested? > + unsigned int i, irqs; > struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; > > irqs = min(pmu_device->num_resources, num_possible_cpus()); > + if (!irqs) > + return; > > - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { > - if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs)) > - continue; > - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); > - if (irq >= 0) > - free_irq(irq, armpmu); > + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); > + if (irq <= 0) > + return; Then this is just an if (!irq), as I mentioned last time. Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt 2013-12-03 11:30 ` Will Deacon @ 2013-12-03 11:49 ` Vinayak Kale 2013-12-03 13:41 ` Will Deacon 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-03 11:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:34:03AM +0000, Vinayak Kale wrote: >> Add support for irq registration when pmu interrupt is percpu. >> >> Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale@apm.com> >> Signed-off-by: Tuan Phan <tphan@apm.com> >> --- >> arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >> 1 file changed, 86 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >> index cea1594..d2d562f 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c >> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ >> >> #include <linux/bitmap.h> >> #include <linux/interrupt.h> >> +#include <linux/irq.h> >> #include <linux/kernel.h> >> #include <linux/export.h> >> #include <linux/perf_event.h> >> @@ -363,26 +364,61 @@ validate_group(struct perf_event *event) >> } >> >> static void >> +armpmu_disable_percpu_irq(void *data) >> +{ >> + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; >> + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; >> + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); >> + >> + cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); >> + disable_percpu_irq(irq); >> +} >> + >> +static void >> armpmu_release_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) >> { >> - int i, irq, irqs; >> + int irq; > > Why did you not make this unsigned, like I suggested? Suggestion was to make 'irqs' variable unsigned and modify the check for 'irqs' to if (!irqs). This patch incorporates that suggestion. We have to keep 'irq' signed only. 'platform_get_irq()' can return error value. > >> + unsigned int i, irqs; >> struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; >> >> irqs = min(pmu_device->num_resources, num_possible_cpus()); >> + if (!irqs) >> + return; >> >> - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { >> - if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs)) >> - continue; >> - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); >> - if (irq >= 0) >> - free_irq(irq, armpmu); >> + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); >> + if (irq <= 0) >> + return; > > Then this is just an if (!irq), as I mentioned last time. Please see my above comment. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt 2013-12-03 11:49 ` Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-03 13:41 ` Will Deacon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2013-12-03 13:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 11:49:11AM +0000, Vinayak Kale wrote: > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:34:03AM +0000, Vinayak Kale wrote: > >> Add support for irq registration when pmu interrupt is percpu. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale@apm.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Tuan Phan <tphan@apm.com> > >> --- > >> arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > >> 1 file changed, 86 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > >> index cea1594..d2d562f 100644 > >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > >> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ > >> > >> #include <linux/bitmap.h> > >> #include <linux/interrupt.h> > >> +#include <linux/irq.h> > >> #include <linux/kernel.h> > >> #include <linux/export.h> > >> #include <linux/perf_event.h> > >> @@ -363,26 +364,61 @@ validate_group(struct perf_event *event) > >> } > >> > >> static void > >> +armpmu_disable_percpu_irq(void *data) > >> +{ > >> + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; > >> + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; > >> + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); > >> + > >> + cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); > >> + disable_percpu_irq(irq); > >> +} > >> + > >> +static void > >> armpmu_release_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) > >> { > >> - int i, irq, irqs; > >> + int irq; > > > > Why did you not make this unsigned, like I suggested? > > Suggestion was to make 'irqs' variable unsigned and modify the check > for 'irqs' to if (!irqs). > This patch incorporates that suggestion. > > We have to keep 'irq' signed only. 'platform_get_irq()' can return error value. Damn, yes, I see the issue there. Ok, I'll go back and take another look at your patch... Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt Vinayak Kale 2013-12-03 11:30 ` Will Deacon @ 2013-12-03 13:50 ` Will Deacon 2013-12-04 6:26 ` Vinayak Kale 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Will Deacon @ 2013-12-03 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:34:03AM +0000, Vinayak Kale wrote: > static void > +armpmu_disable_percpu_irq(void *data) > +{ > + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; > + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; > + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); > + > + cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); Why not just cpumask_clear_cpu? > + disable_percpu_irq(irq); > +} > + > +static void > armpmu_release_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) > { > - int i, irq, irqs; > + int irq; > + unsigned int i, irqs; > struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; > > irqs = min(pmu_device->num_resources, num_possible_cpus()); > + if (!irqs) > + return; > > - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { > - if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs)) > - continue; > - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); > - if (irq >= 0) > - free_irq(irq, armpmu); > + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); > + if (irq <= 0) > + return; > + > + if (irq_is_percpu(irq)) { > + on_each_cpu(armpmu_disable_percpu_irq, armpmu, 1); > + free_percpu_irq(irq, &cpu_hw_events); > + } else { > + for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { > + if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs)) > + continue; > + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); > + if (irq > 0) > + free_irq(irq, armpmu); > + } > } > } > > +static void > +armpmu_enable_percpu_irq(void *data) > +{ > + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; > + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; > + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); > + > + enable_percpu_irq(irq, IRQ_TYPE_NONE); > + cpumask_set_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); Hmm, wouldn't it make more sense to pass the irq in data, then deal with the mask in the caller? (since the mask will *always* be updated by each CPU). Similarly for the disable path. Will ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt 2013-12-03 13:50 ` Will Deacon @ 2013-12-04 6:26 ` Vinayak Kale 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Vinayak Kale @ 2013-12-04 6:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:34:03AM +0000, Vinayak Kale wrote: >> static void >> +armpmu_disable_percpu_irq(void *data) >> +{ >> + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; >> + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; >> + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); >> + >> + cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); > > Why not just cpumask_clear_cpu? Yes, that would have serve the purpose. It was due to dumb copy/paste from non-percpu counterpart. > >> + disable_percpu_irq(irq); >> +} >> + >> +static void >> armpmu_release_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu) >> { >> - int i, irq, irqs; >> + int irq; >> + unsigned int i, irqs; >> struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; >> >> irqs = min(pmu_device->num_resources, num_possible_cpus()); >> + if (!irqs) >> + return; >> >> - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { >> - if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs)) >> - continue; >> - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); >> - if (irq >= 0) >> - free_irq(irq, armpmu); >> + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); >> + if (irq <= 0) >> + return; >> + >> + if (irq_is_percpu(irq)) { >> + on_each_cpu(armpmu_disable_percpu_irq, armpmu, 1); >> + free_percpu_irq(irq, &cpu_hw_events); >> + } else { >> + for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) { >> + if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs)) >> + continue; >> + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i); >> + if (irq > 0) >> + free_irq(irq, armpmu); >> + } >> } >> } >> >> +static void >> +armpmu_enable_percpu_irq(void *data) >> +{ >> + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data; >> + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device; >> + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0); >> + >> + enable_percpu_irq(irq, IRQ_TYPE_NONE); >> + cpumask_set_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs); > > Hmm, wouldn't it make more sense to pass the irq in data, then deal with the > mask in the caller? (since the mask will *always* be updated by each CPU). > > Similarly for the disable path. Okay. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-12-04 6:26 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-12-02 9:34 [PATCH V6 0/2] genirq: arm64: perf: support for percpu pmu interrupt Vinayak Kale 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 1/2] genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag Vinayak Kale 2013-12-03 11:27 ` Will Deacon 2013-12-02 9:34 ` [PATCH V6 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt Vinayak Kale 2013-12-03 11:30 ` Will Deacon 2013-12-03 11:49 ` Vinayak Kale 2013-12-03 13:41 ` Will Deacon 2013-12-03 13:50 ` Will Deacon 2013-12-04 6:26 ` Vinayak Kale
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).