| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <528CB5AC.5080007@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 13:14:20 +0000
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To: Vinayak Kale <vkale@....com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
"jcm@...hat.com" <jcm@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tuan Phan <tphan@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt
[dropped patches@....com]
Vinayak,
Please keep reviewers on CC, as it makes easier to track the changes.
On 20/11/13 11:13, Vinayak Kale wrote:
> Add support for irq registration when pmu interrupt is percpu.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Tuan Phan <tphan@....com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 108 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> index cea1594..de12ba8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>
> #include <linux/bitmap.h>
> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> +#include <linux/irq.h>
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> #include <linux/export.h>
> #include <linux/perf_event.h>
> @@ -363,22 +364,55 @@ validate_group(struct perf_event *event)
> }
>
> static void
> +armpmu_disable_percpu_irq(void *data)
> +{
> + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data;
> + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device;
> + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0);
> +
> + cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs);
> + disable_percpu_irq(irq);
> +}
> +
> +static void
> armpmu_release_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu)
> {
> int i, irq, irqs;
> struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device;
>
> irqs = min(pmu_device->num_resources, num_possible_cpus());
> + if (irqs < 1)
> + return;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) {
> - if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs))
> - continue;
> - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i);
> - if (irq >= 0)
> - free_irq(irq, armpmu);
> + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0);
> + if (irq < 0)
So I'm going to sound like a stuck record: irq == 0 is not a valid IRQ
number, full stop. This is how we express the fact that there is no IRQ.
If you're touching that code, you might as well fix this buglet.
> + return;
> +
> + if (irq_is_percpu(irq)) {
> + on_each_cpu(armpmu_disable_percpu_irq, armpmu, 1);
> + free_percpu_irq(irq, &cpu_hw_events);
> + } else {
> + for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) {
> + if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs))
> + continue;
> + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i);
> + if (irq >= 0)
Same here.
> + free_irq(irq, armpmu);
> + }
> }
> }
>
> +static void
> +armpmu_enable_percpu_irq(void *data)
> +{
> + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data;
> + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device;
> + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0);
> +
> + enable_percpu_irq(irq, 0);
> + cpumask_set_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &armpmu->active_irqs);
> +}
> +
> static int
> armpmu_reserve_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu)
> {
> @@ -396,34 +430,54 @@ armpmu_reserve_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu)
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) {
> - err = 0;
> - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i);
> - if (irq < 0)
> - continue;
> + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0);
> + if (irq < 0) {
And here.
> + pr_err("failed to get an irq for PMU device\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
>
> - /*
> - * If we have a single PMU interrupt that we can't shift,
> - * assume that we're running on a uniprocessor machine and
> - * continue. Otherwise, continue without this interrupt.
> - */
> - if (irq_set_affinity(irq, cpumask_of(i)) && irqs > 1) {
> - pr_warning("unable to set irq affinity (irq=%d, cpu=%u)\n",
> - irq, i);
> - continue;
> - }
> + if (irq_is_percpu(irq)) {
> + err = request_percpu_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq,
> + "arm-pmu", &cpu_hw_events);
>
> - err = request_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq,
> - IRQF_NOBALANCING,
> - "arm-pmu", armpmu);
> if (err) {
> - pr_err("unable to request IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n",
> - irq);
> + pr_err("unable to request percpu IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n",
> + irq);
> armpmu_release_hardware(armpmu);
> return err;
> }
>
> - cpumask_set_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs);
> + on_each_cpu(armpmu_enable_percpu_irq, armpmu, 1);
> + } else {
> + for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) {
> + err = 0;
> + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i);
> + if (irq < 0)
And here.
> + continue;
> +
> + /*
> + * If we have a single PMU interrupt that we can't shift,
> + * assume that we're running on a uniprocessor machine and
> + * continue. Otherwise, continue without this interrupt.
> + */
> + if (irq_set_affinity(irq, cpumask_of(i)) && irqs > 1) {
> + pr_warning("unable to set irq affinity (irq=%d, cpu=%u)\n",
> + irq, i);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + err = request_irq(irq, armpmu->handle_irq,
> + IRQF_NOBALANCING,
> + "arm-pmu", armpmu);
> + if (err) {
> + pr_err("unable to request IRQ%d for ARM PMU counters\n",
> + irq);
> + armpmu_release_hardware(armpmu);
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + cpumask_set_cpu(i, &armpmu->active_irqs);
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
>
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists