From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv3 08/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: split cpu-local irq request/free
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 19:33:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170418183316.GM17866@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdVV4qMyYTYN92TE4fsrxo66WK-Gd001YbJZok2txOH4ig@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 07:25:28PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Mark,
Hi Geert,
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > Currently we have functions to request/free all IRQs for a given PMU.
> > While this works today, this won't work for ACPI, where we don't know
> > the full set of IRQs up front, and need to request them separately.
> >
> > To enable supporting ACPI, this patch splits out the cpu-local
> > request/free into new functions, allowing us to request/free individual
> > IRQs.
> >
> > As this makes it possible/necessary to request a PPI once per cpu, an
> > additional check is added to detect mismatched PPIs. This shouldn't
> > matter for the DT / platform case, as we check this when parsing.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Tested-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>
> This patch causes warnings during PSCI system suspend on R-Car Gen3.
>
> On R-Car M3-W (Dual CA57):
>
> Disabling non-boot CPUs ...
> +IRQ15 no longer affine to CPU1
> CPU1: shutdown
> psci: CPU1 killed.
>
> On R-Car H3 (Quad CA57):
>
> Disabling non-boot CPUs ...
> +IRQ15 no longer affine to CPU1
> CPU1: shutdown
> psci: CPU1 killed.
> +IRQ16 no longer affine to CPU2
> CPU2: shutdown
> psci: CPU2 killed.
> +IRQ17 no longer affine to CPU3
> CPU3: shutdown
> psci: CPU3 killed.
>
> Unfortunately it can't be reverted easily.
>
> Do you have any clue?
Not presently. I'm somewhat surprised that this patch would have that
effect -- I would imagine that the rework this is based on is more
likely to. e.g. commit:
c09adab01e4aeecf ("drivers/perf: arm_pmu: split irq request from enable")
Just to check, you definitely don't see these warnings immediately prior
to applying this patch?
My best guess otherwise is that prior to this patch, the PMU IRQ
request was failing earlier, and we bailed out.
Can you dump a dmesg before and after this patch, and see if the arm_pmu
driver dumps anything?
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-18 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-11 8:39 [PATCHv3 00/14] arm_pmu: ACPI support Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 01/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: remove pointless PMU disabling Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 02/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: define armpmu_init_fn Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 03/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: fold init into alloc Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 04/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: factor out pmu registration Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 05/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: simplify cpu_pmu_request_irqs() Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 06/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: handle no platform_device Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 07/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: rename irq request/free functions Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 08/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: split cpu-local irq request/free Mark Rutland
2017-04-18 17:25 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-04-18 18:24 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-04-18 18:33 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2017-04-18 18:57 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-04-20 19:10 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 09/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: move irq request/free into probe Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 10/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: split out platform device probe logic Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 11/14] arm64: add function to get a cpu's MADT GICC table Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 12/14] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: add ACPI framework Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 13/14] arm64: pmuv3: handle !PMUv3 when probing Mark Rutland
2017-04-13 14:06 ` Jayachandran C.
2017-04-13 15:36 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 8:39 ` [PATCHv3 14/14] arm64: pmuv3: use arm_pmu ACPI framework Mark Rutland
2017-04-11 15:11 ` [PATCHv3 00/14] arm_pmu: ACPI support Anurup M
2017-04-11 15:45 ` Will Deacon
2017-04-12 6:48 ` Hanjun Guo
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=20170418183316.GM17866@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