[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YH+/qyUVtlHwWQJ/@vkoul-mobl.Dlink>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:31:15 +0530
From: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To: "Zanussi, Tom" <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, acme@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
kan.liang@...ux.intel.com, dave.jiang@...el.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] dmaengine: idxd: Add IDXD performance monitor
support
On 20-04-21, 09:13, Zanussi, Tom wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
>
> On 4/20/2021 6:11 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 03-04-21, 11:45, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> >
> > > +config INTEL_IDXD_PERFMON
> > > + bool "Intel Data Accelerators performance monitor support"
> > > + depends on INTEL_IDXD
> > > + default y
> >
> > default y..?
>
> Will change to n.
That is the default, you may drop this line
>
> >
> > > /* IDXD software descriptor */
> > > @@ -369,4 +399,19 @@ int idxd_cdev_get_major(struct idxd_device *idxd);
> > > int idxd_wq_add_cdev(struct idxd_wq *wq);
> > > void idxd_wq_del_cdev(struct idxd_wq *wq);
> > > +/* perfmon */
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_IDXD_PERFMON
> >
> > maybe use IS_ENABLED()
?
> >
> > > @@ -556,6 +562,8 @@ static int __init idxd_init_module(void)
> > > for (i = 0; i < IDXD_TYPE_MAX; i++)
> > > idr_init(&idxd_idrs[i]);
> > > + perfmon_init();
> > > +
> > > err = idxd_register_bus_type();
> > > if (err < 0)
> > > return err;
> > > @@ -589,5 +597,6 @@ static void __exit idxd_exit_module(void)
> > > pci_unregister_driver(&idxd_pci_driver);
> > > idxd_cdev_remove();
> > > idxd_unregister_bus_type();
> > > + perfmon_exit();
> >
> > Ideally would make sense to add perfmon module first and then add use in
> > idxd..
> >
>
> OK, I'll separate this out into a separate patch.
>
> > > +static ssize_t cpumask_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> > > + char *buf);
> > > +
> > > +static cpumask_t perfmon_dsa_cpu_mask;
> > > +static bool cpuhp_set_up;
> > > +static enum cpuhp_state cpuhp_slot;
> > > +
> > > +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(cpumask);
> >
> > Pls document these new attributes added
?
> >
> > > +static int perfmon_collect_events(struct idxd_pmu *idxd_pmu,
> > > + struct perf_event *leader,
> > > + bool dogrp)
> >
> > dogrp..?
> >
>
> Yeah, bad name, first thought on seeing it is always 'dog'. ;-)
Yep, that was my first read as well... i guess it would be better as
do_grp
--
~Vinod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists