[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180517180758.GK12198@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 20:07:59 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: bcm2835: Add the PMU to the devicetree.
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 06:55:26PM +0200, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> > Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu> hat am 17. Mai 2018 um 18:34 geschrieben:
> > On Thu, 17 May 2018, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> > > > Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net> hat am 17. Mai 2018 um 15:17 geschrieben:
> > > > The a53 and a7 counters seem to match up, so we advertise a7 so that
> > > > arm32 can probe.
> >
> > so how closely did you look at the a53/a7 differences? I see some major
> > differences, especially with the CPU_CYCLES event (0xff vs 0x11).
> >
> > The proper fix here might be to add a cortex-a53 PMU entry to the armv7
> > code rather than trying to treat it as a cortex-a7.
>
> we like to use the PMU of BCM2837 SoC (4x A53 cores) under arm32 and arm64.
>
> What is the right way (tm) to the define the DT compatibles?
> Does the arm32 PMU driver need patching for proper A53 support?
I'm completely clueless on all of this; Mark might have ideas.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists