[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56939CC0.1@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 12:14:56 +0000
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
arm@...nel.org, punit.agrawal@....com, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/11] arm-cci: Provide hook for writing to PMU
counters
On 11/01/16 10:54, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 11:54:47AM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>> static struct cci_pmu_model cci_pmu_models[];
>> @@ -846,7 +847,15 @@ static void pmu_write_counter(struct perf_event *event, u32 value)
>> dev_err(&cci_pmu->plat_device->dev, "Invalid CCI PMU counter %d\n", idx);
>> return;
>> }
>> - __pmu_write_counter(cci_pmu, value, idx);
>> +
>> + if (cci_pmu->model->write_counters) {
>> + unsigned long mask[BITS_TO_LONGS(cci_pmu->num_cntrs)];
>> +
>> + memset(mask, 0, BITS_TO_LONGS(cci_pmu->num_cntrs) * sizeof(unsigned long));
>> + set_bit(idx, mask);
>> + cci_pmu->model->write_counters(cci_pmu, mask, value);
>> + } else
>> + __pmu_write_counter(cci_pmu, value, idx);
>> }
>
> It would be much simpler to always log writes here, and only do the real
> wirtes in batches when we re-enable the PMU (with appropriate
> disable/enable calls in the IRQ handler).
>
> We'd still need special hooks for CCIs which require a special dance to
> program them, but all the logic to handle the writes would be in one
> place.
This one is only there for the writes from the irq handler. Now that
we have decided to disable pmu there, we could batch this one too.
Cheers
Suzuki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists