From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] arm-cci: ensure perf synchronisation
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 11:44:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160704104407.GB6774@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160704103130.GA6774@leverpostej>
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 11:31:31AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 11:22:05AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 06:50:18PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > Currently the IRQ core is permitted to make the CCI PMU IRQ handler
> > > threaded, and will allow userspace to change the CPU affinity of the
> > > interrupt behind our back. Both of these could violate our
> > > synchronisation requirements with the core perf code, which relies upon
> > > strict CPU affinity and disabling of interrupts to guarantee mutual
> > > exclusion in some cases.
> >
> > Minor nit, but I think $subject is particularly unhelpful for these two
> > patches. How about "arm-ccX: fix PMU interrupt flags"?
>
> Sure, I'll move over to that wording.
>
> > > @@ -881,7 +881,8 @@ static int pmu_request_irq(struct cci_pmu *cci_pmu, irq_handler_t handler)
> > > * This should allow handling of non-unique interrupt for the counters.
> > > */
> > > for (i = 0; i < cci_pmu->nr_irqs; i++) {
> > > - int err = request_irq(cci_pmu->irqs[i], handler, IRQF_SHARED,
> >
> > Why is this shared and who is the line shared with? We should check that
> > we don't have contradictory IRQ flags in the other irq request path(s).
>
> Hmm... I thought that was so the driver could request the same IRQ
> multiple times in the case of muxing, but I see we've always had the
> is_duplicate_irq logic.
>
> The IRQF_SHARED flags has also been there since day one, so I'm not sure
> if that's needed for some platform or whether that was added out of
> habit.
>
> Punit, do you recall if/why IRQF_SHARED was used?
>
> I'll take a look at dts and see if I can get rid of it.
Tree-wide there only appears to be one instance of the pmu node:
[mark at leverpostej:~/src/linux]% git grep 'cci-.*-pmu' -- arch
arch/arm/boot/dts/vexpress-v2p-ca15_a7.dts: compatible = "arm,cci-400-pmu,r0";
Which has locally-unique interrupts...
pmu at 9000 {
compatible = "arm,cci-400-pmu,r0";
reg = <0x9000 0x5000>;
interrupts = <0 105 4>,
<0 101 4>,
<0 102 4>,
<0 103 4>,
<0 104 4>;
};
.. and from reading the A15x2-A7x3 board TRM, they're globally unique (i.e. not
shared) too.
I'll drop the IRQF_SHARED in v2.
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-04 10:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-28 17:50 [PATCH 0/2] arm-cc*: ensure perf synchronisation Mark Rutland
2016-06-28 17:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm-ccn: " Mark Rutland
2016-07-04 13:39 ` Pawel Moll
2016-07-04 13:50 ` Mark Rutland
2016-06-28 17:50 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm-cci: " Mark Rutland
2016-07-04 10:22 ` Will Deacon
2016-07-04 10:31 ` Mark Rutland
2016-07-04 10:44 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2016-07-04 11:16 ` Punit Agrawal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160704104407.GB6774@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox