public inbox for linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@oss.nxp.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] arm-smmu-v3: Add PMCG child support and update PMU MMIO mapping
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2026 21:47:20 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <adZcaEKm3vIYSy3N@shlinux89> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2c1a1694-9597-400d-b441-714225b5377b@arm.com>

On Wed, Apr 08, 2026 at 12:15:31PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>On 2026-04-08 8:51 am, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
>> This patch series adds proper support for describing and probing the
>> Arm SMMU v3 PMCG (Performance Monitor Control Group) as a child node of
>> the SMMU in Devicetree, and updates the relevant drivers accordingly.
>> 
>> The SMMU v3 architecture allows an optional PMCG block, typically
>> associated with TCUs, to be implemented within the SMMU register
>> address space. For example, mmu700 PMCG is at the offset 0x2000 of the
>> TCU page 0.
>
>But what's wrong with the existing binding? Especially given that it even has
>an upstream user already:
>
>https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/aef9703dcbf8
>
>> Patch 1 updates the SMMU v3 Devicetree binding to allow PMCG child nodes,
>> referencing the existing arm,smmu-v3-pmcg binding.
>> 
>> Patch 2 updates the arm-smmu-v3 driver to populate platform devices for
>> child nodes described in DT once the SMMU probe succeeds.
>> 
>> Patch 3 updates the SMMUv3 PMU driver to correctly handle MMIO mapping when
>> PMCG is described as a child node. The PMCG registers occupy a sub-region
>> of the parent SMMU MMIO window, which is already requested by the SMMU
>
>That has not been the case since 52f3fab0067d ("iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Don't
>reserve implementation defined register space") nearly 6 years ago, where the
>whole purpose was to support Arm's PMCG implementation properly. What kernel
>is this based on?

Seems I am wrong. I thought PMCG is in page 0, so there were resource
conflicts. I just retest without this patchset, all goes well.

But from dt perspective, should the TCU PMCG node be child node of
SMMU node?

Thanks,
Peng

>
>Thanks,
>Robin.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
>> ---
>> Peng Fan (3):
>>        dt-bindings: iommu: arm-smmu-v3: Allow PMU child nodes
>>        iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Populate PMU child devices from Devicetree
>>        perf/arm-smmuv3: Avoid double-requesting shared SMMU MMIO for PMCG
>> 
>>   .../devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu-v3.yaml        | 10 ++++++++++
>>   drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c           |  3 +++
>>   drivers/perf/arm_smmuv3_pmu.c                         | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
>>   3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> ---
>> base-commit: f3e6330d7fe42b204af05a2dbc68b379e0ad179e
>> change-id: 20260408-smmu-perf-754367fe66c8
>> 
>> Best regards,
>
>

      reply	other threads:[~2026-04-08 13:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-08  7:51 [PATCH 0/3] arm-smmu-v3: Add PMCG child support and update PMU MMIO mapping Peng Fan (OSS)
2026-04-08  7:51 ` [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: iommu: arm-smmu-v3: Allow PMU child nodes Peng Fan (OSS)
2026-04-08  7:51 ` [PATCH 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Populate PMU child devices from Devicetree Peng Fan (OSS)
2026-04-08  8:39   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-08  7:51 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf/arm-smmuv3: Avoid double-requesting shared SMMU MMIO for PMCG Peng Fan (OSS)
2026-04-08  8:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-08 11:15 ` [PATCH 0/3] arm-smmu-v3: Add PMCG child support and update PMU MMIO mapping Robin Murphy
2026-04-08 13:47   ` Peng Fan [this message]

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=adZcaEKm3vIYSy3N@shlinux89 \
    --to=peng.fan@oss.nxp.com \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=peng.fan@nxp.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.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