From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jan.glauber@caviumnetworks.com (Jan Glauber) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 13:18:27 +0200 Subject: [RFC PATCH v9 5/7] perf: cavium: Support memory controller PMU counters In-Reply-To: <20170831103119.GC15031@leverpostej> References: <20170829131238.4988-1-jglauber@cavium.com> <20170829131238.4988-6-jglauber@cavium.com> <20170831095746.GB15906@hc> <20170831103119.GC15031@leverpostej> Message-ID: <20170831111827.GD15906@hc> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 11:31:20AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 11:57:46AM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:54:03AM +0800, Zhangshaokun wrote: > > > On 2017/8/29 21:12, Jan Glauber wrote: [...] > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h > > > > index 82b30e6..ca84ac8 100644 > > > > --- a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h > > > > +++ b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h > > > > @@ -139,6 +139,7 @@ enum cpuhp_state { > > > > CPUHP_AP_PERF_ARM_QCOM_L3_ONLINE, > > > > CPUHP_AP_WORKQUEUE_ONLINE, > > > > CPUHP_AP_RCUTREE_ONLINE, > > > > + CPUHP_AP_PERF_ARM_CVM_ONLINE, > > > > > > Alphabetic order? > > > > These don't look alphabetically ordered to me. > > Sure, the full list is ordered by dependency. > > However, we've generally kept the uncore PMUs together, and within the > group of system PMU CPUHP_AP_PERF_ARM_* callbacks, we've retained > alphabetical order. > > Does this PMU need workqueues and RCU up before its HP callback is > invoked? Or can this be moved into the group of CPUHP_AP_PERF_ARM_* > above CPUHP_AP_WORKQUEUE_ONLINE and CPUHP_AP_RCUTREE_ONLINE? i.e. > between CPUHP_AP_PERF_ARM_CCN_ONLINE and CPUHP_AP_PERF_ARM_L2X0_ONLINE. I think I can move it inside the CPUHP_AP_PERF_ARM_* group. --Jan > THanks, > Mark.