From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, eranian@google.com,
namhyung@kernel.org, acme@kernel.org, jolsa@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] perf: Create a symlink for a PMU
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 19:35:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YNTCa5QO1YMy8fJ0@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <33bccec9-c4c4-d52b-9ee4-9a09e7353812@linux.intel.com>
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 01:07:14PM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote:
>
>
> On 6/24/2021 11:31 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 08:24:29AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >
> > > On 6/24/2021 7:29 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 07:24:31AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > > > But first off, why is this symlink suddenly needed? What is so special
> > > > > > about this new hardware that it breaks the existing model?
> > > > > The driver can be in two modes:
> > > > >
> > > > > - Driver fully knows the hardware and puts in the correct Linux names
> > > > >
> > > > > - Driver doesn't know the hardware but is in a fallback mode where it only
> > > > > looks at a discovery table. There we don't have the correct names, just an
> > > > > numeric identifier for the different hardware sub components.
> > > > Why does this matter? Why would the driver not "know" the hardware? If
> > > > it doesn't know it, why would it bind to it?
> > >
> > > It's a similar concept as a PCI class. How to have a driver that can handle
> > > future hardware, but with some restrictions
> >
> > But this is NOT how busses work in the driver model.
> >
> > PCI classes are great, but we do NOT suddenly add a symlink in sysfs if
> > a driver goes from being handled by "generic_pci_type_foo" to
> > "vendor_foo". Userspace can handle the change and life goes on.
> >
> > > The perf CPU PMU has had a similar concept for a long time. The driver can
> > > be either in architectural mode (with a subset of features), or be fully
> > > enabled. This allows users who are on an older kernel to still use at least
> > > a subset of the functionality.
> >
> > So a device name will move from "generic" to "specific", right?
>
> We'd like to keep both names.
That is not how sysfs and the driver model works, sorry. You don't get
to keep both names, otherwise sysfs would be even more of a mess than it
currently is. What happens if you need "another" name in the future?
When do you stop?
this isn't ok, please do it right.
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-24 17:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-24 1:22 [PATCH 0/7] perf: Add Sapphire Rapids server uncore support kan.liang
2021-06-24 1:22 ` [PATCH 1/7] driver core: Add a way to get to bus devices kset kan.liang
2021-06-24 5:41 ` Greg KH
2021-06-24 1:22 ` [PATCH 2/7] perf: Create a symlink for a PMU kan.liang
2021-06-24 5:48 ` Greg KH
2021-06-24 14:24 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-24 14:29 ` Greg KH
2021-06-24 15:24 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-24 15:31 ` Greg KH
2021-06-24 17:07 ` Liang, Kan
2021-06-24 17:35 ` Greg KH [this message]
2021-06-24 17:49 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-25 5:18 ` Greg KH
2021-06-25 5:17 ` Greg KH
2021-06-24 17:28 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-25 5:19 ` Greg KH
2021-06-25 14:22 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-25 14:38 ` Greg KH
2021-06-25 14:49 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-25 15:03 ` Liang, Kan
2021-06-25 15:44 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-25 15:57 ` Liang, Kan
2021-06-25 16:18 ` Liang, Kan
2021-06-27 11:02 ` Greg KH
2021-06-27 16:30 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-28 6:55 ` Greg KH
2021-06-28 15:00 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-24 1:22 ` [PATCH 3/7] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Create a symlink for an uncore PMU kan.liang
2021-06-24 5:44 ` Greg KH
2021-06-24 1:22 ` [PATCH 4/7] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Add Sapphire Rapids server support kan.liang
2021-06-24 1:22 ` [PATCH 5/7] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Factor out snr_uncore_mmio_map() kan.liang
2021-06-24 1:22 ` [PATCH 6/7] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Support free-running counters on Sapphire Rapids server kan.liang
2021-06-24 1:22 ` [PATCH 7/7] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix invalid unit check kan.liang
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=YNTCa5QO1YMy8fJ0@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@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