From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jan.glauber@caviumnetworks.com (Jan Glauber) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 10:13:07 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3 1/5] arm64/perf: Rename Cortex A57 events In-Reply-To: <20160215200613.GY6298@arm.com> References: <20160215194037.GU6298@arm.com> <20160215200613.GY6298@arm.com> Message-ID: <20160218091307.GA4566@hardcore> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 08:06:13PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 07:40:37PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 06:11:56PM +0100, Jan Glauber wrote: > > > The implemented Cortex A57 events are not A57 specific. > > > They are recommended by ARM and can be found on other > > > ARMv8 SOCs like Cavium ThunderX too. Therefore move > > > these events to the common PMUv3 table. > > > > I can't find anything in the architecture that suggests these event > > numbers are necessarily portable between implementations. Am I missing > > something? > > Aha, I just noticed appendix K3.1 (silly me for missing it...). > > Lemme check whether or not that mandates that those encodings can't be > used for wildly different things. To me it looks like we would just have duplicated code without the patch, and at least the event types (e.g. L1D_CACHE_RD) should be identical across implementations. But I don't care too much, so please tell me if should drop the patch or keep it. thanks, Jan > Will