From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/perf: arm-pmu: Handle per-interrupt affinity mask
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 15:11:17 +0100
Message-ID: <577D1185.4090801@arm.com>
References: <1467379291-18413-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com>
 <20160706103951.GC17925@arm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160706103951.GC17925@arm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>, cf@rock-chips.com, huangtao@rock-chips.com, jay.xu@rock-chips.com, Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>, David Wu <david.wu@rock-chips.com>, Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On 06/07/16 11:39, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 02:21:31PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On a big-little system, PMUs can be wired to CPUs using per CPU
>> interrups (PPI). In this case, it is important to make sure that
>> the enable/disable do happen on the right set of CPUs.
>>
>> So instead of relying on the interrupt-affinity property, we can
>> use the actual percpu affinity that DT exposes as part of the
>> interrupt specifier. The DT binding is also updated to reflect
>> the fact that the interrupt-affinity property shouldn't be used
>> in that case.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> -	/* If we didn't manage to parse anything, claim to support all CPUs */
>> -	if (cpumask_weight(&pmu->supported_cpus) == 0)
>> -		cpumask_setall(&pmu->supported_cpus);
>> +	/* If we didn't manage to parse anything, try the interrupt affinity */
>> +	if (cpumask_weight(&pmu->supported_cpus) == 0) {
>> +		if (!using_spi) {
>> +			/* If using PPIs, check the affinity of the partition */
>> +			int irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
>> +			irq_get_percpu_devid_partition(irq,
>> +						       &pmu->supported_cpus);
> 
> Should we not at least propagate the failure if this returns -EINVAL?

Good point. I'll fix that and resend it.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...