[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140211165013.GV27965@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 17:50:13 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] perf/x86/uncore: add SNB/IVB/HSW client uncore
memory controller support
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 05:25:39PM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 04:20:12PM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >> This patch adds a new uncore PMU for Intel SNB/IVB/HSW client
> >
> >
> >> @@ -3501,6 +3844,28 @@ static int __init uncore_pci_init(void)
> >> pci_uncores = ivt_pci_uncores;
> >> uncore_pci_driver = &ivt_uncore_pci_driver;
> >> break;
> >> + case 42: /* Sandy Bridge */
> >> + ret = snb_pci2phy_map_init(PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_SNB_IMC);
> >> + if (ret)
> >> + return ret;
> >> + pci_uncores = snb_pci_uncores;
> >> + uncore_pci_driver = &snb_uncore_pci_driver;
> >> + break;
> >> + case 60: /* Haswell */
> >> + case 69: /* Haswell Celeron */
> >> + ret = snb_pci2phy_map_init(PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_HSW_IMC);
> >> + if (ret)
> >> + return ret;
> >> + pci_uncores = snb_pci_uncores;
> >> + uncore_pci_driver = &hsw_uncore_pci_driver;
> >> + break;
> >> + case 58: /* Ivy Bridge */
> >> + ret = snb_pci2phy_map_init(PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_IVB_IMC);
> >> + if (ret)
> >> + return ret;
> >> + pci_uncores = snb_pci_uncores;
> >> + uncore_pci_driver = &ivb_uncore_pci_driver;
> >> + break;
> >> default:
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >
> > I reorderd that list; but looking at perf_event_intel.c we have a lot
> > more HSW clients listed there. Plz as to make it consistent.
>
> I don't have all of them, so no testing possible. I doubt they have so
> many clients model numbers.
Yeah, I don't have any of those chips.. last I have is WSM-EP.
Anyway, perf_event_intel.c lists: 60,63,69,70,71 as being haswell
clients. Andi did all that, so if its wrong its on Intel anyway.
I'm still thinking we ought to make a big Intel classification function;
something that returns something like:
struct intel_part {
enum { client, ep, ex } type;
enum { core, core2, nhm, wsm, snb, ivb, hsw } gen;
};
And we can do things like:
if (ip.type == client && ip.gen >= snb)
And then we only have to fix up the one classification function with all
those stupid model numbers, instead of having them duplicated all over
the stinking place.
--
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