[PATCH 1/4] ARM: perf: don't warn about missing interrupt-affinity property for PPIs

[mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 02:50:30PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> PPIs are affine by nature, so the interrupt-affinity property is not
> used and therefore we shouldn't print a warning in its absence.
> 
> Reported-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c | 7 ++++++-
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c
> index 91c7ba182dcd..becf7ad6eddc 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c
> @@ -303,12 +303,17 @@ static int probe_current_pmu(struct arm_pmu *pmu)
>  
>  static int of_pmu_irq_cfg(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
> -	int i;
> +	int i, irq;
>  	int *irqs = kcalloc(pdev->num_resources, sizeof(*irqs), GFP_KERNEL);
>  
>  	if (!irqs)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> +	/* Don't bother with PPIs; they're already affine */
> +	irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> +	if (irq >= 0 && irq_is_percpu(irq))
> +		return 0;

Is 0 still a valid IRQ on any ARM platforms?

Otherwise, looks fine to me.

Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>

Mark