[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <563B2D46.10503@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 10:19:50 +0000
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, punit.agrawal@....com,
arm@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] arm-cci: Add routines to enable/disable all
counters
On 05/11/15 10:14, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> On 04/11/15 18:28, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 02:05:25PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>>> Adds helper routines to manipulate the counter controls for
>>> all the counters on the CCI PMU.
>>> +static void pmu_disable_counters_ctrl(struct cci_pmu *cci_pmu, unsigned long *mask)
>>> +{
>>> + int i;
>>> +
>>> + for (i = 0; i < cci_pmu->num_cntrs; i++) {
>>> + clear_bit(i, mask);
>>> + if (pmu_get_counter_ctrl(cci_pmu, i)) {
>>> + set_bit(i, mask);
>>> + pmu_disable_counter(cci_pmu, i);
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +}
>>
>> I don't understand what's going on with the mask here. Why do we clear
>> ieach bit when the only user (introduced in the next patch) explicitly
>> clears the mask anyway?
>
> To be more precise, it should have been :
>
> if (pmu_get_counter_ctrl(cci_pmu, i)) {
> set_bit(i, mask);
> pmu_disable_counter(cci_pmu, i);
> } else
> clear_bit(i, mask);
Forgot to mention, the explicit clearing is for the bits that may be
beyond the num_counters. Since we limit it to cci_pmu->num_cntrs here
we could get rid of that.
Thanks
Suzuki
--
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