[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3b952043-53a0-b15e-47bb-e4680c1860c9@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 09:57:17 +0800
From: "liuqi (BA)" <liuqi115@...wei.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>
CC: <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
<leo.yan@...aro.org>, <james.clark@....com>, <will@...nel.org>,
<robin.murphy@....com>, <acme@...nel.org>, <john.garry@...wei.com>,
<helgaas@...nel.org>, <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
<mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>, <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
<mark.rutland@....com>, <joro@...tes.org>,
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
<mingo@...hat.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
<iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, <prime.zeng@...wei.com>,
<zhangshaokun@...ilicon.com>, <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/8] perf tool: Add support for HiSilicon PCIe Tune and
Trace device driver
On 2022/5/16 22:20, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 16 May 2022 20:52:20 +0800
> Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Qi Liu <liuqi115@...wei.com>
>>
>> HiSilicon PCIe tune and trace device (PTT) could dynamically tune
>> the PCIe link's events, and trace the TLP headers).
>>
>> This patch add support for PTT device in perf tool, so users could
>> use 'perf record' to get TLP headers trace data.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qi Liu <liuqi115@...wei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>
>
> One query inline.
>
>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/auxtrace.c b/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/auxtrace.c
>> index 384c7cfda0fd..297fffedf45e 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/auxtrace.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/auxtrace.c
>
> ...
>
>> static struct perf_pmu *find_pmu_for_event(struct perf_pmu **pmus,
>> int pmu_nr, struct evsel *evsel)
>> {
>> @@ -71,17 +120,21 @@ struct auxtrace_record
>> {
>> struct perf_pmu *cs_etm_pmu = NULL;
>> struct perf_pmu **arm_spe_pmus = NULL;
>> + struct perf_pmu **hisi_ptt_pmus = NULL;
>> struct evsel *evsel;
>> struct perf_pmu *found_etm = NULL;
>> struct perf_pmu *found_spe = NULL;
>> + struct perf_pmu *found_ptt = NULL;
>> int auxtrace_event_cnt = 0;
>> int nr_spes = 0;
>> + int nr_ptts = 0;
>>
>> if (!evlist)
>> return NULL;
>>
>> cs_etm_pmu = perf_pmu__find(CORESIGHT_ETM_PMU_NAME);
>> arm_spe_pmus = find_all_arm_spe_pmus(&nr_spes, err);
>> + hisi_ptt_pmus = find_all_hisi_ptt_pmus(&nr_ptts, err);
>>
>> evlist__for_each_entry(evlist, evsel) {
>> if (cs_etm_pmu && !found_etm)
>> @@ -89,9 +142,13 @@ struct auxtrace_record
>>
>> if (arm_spe_pmus && !found_spe)
>> found_spe = find_pmu_for_event(arm_spe_pmus, nr_spes, evsel);
>> +
>> + if (arm_spe_pmus && !found_spe)
>
> if (hisi_ptt_pmus && !found_ptt) ?
>
> Otherwise, I'm not sure what the purpose of the checking against spe is.
>
yes...it's a typo here, thanks for the reminder!
Qi
>> + found_ptt = find_pmu_for_event(hisi_ptt_pmus, nr_ptts, evsel);
>> }
>>
>> free(arm_spe_pmus);
>> + free(hisi_ptt_pmus);
>>
>> if (found_etm)
>> auxtrace_event_cnt++;
>> @@ -99,6 +156,9 @@ struct auxtrace_record
>> if (found_spe)
>> auxtrace_event_cnt++;
>>
>> + if (found_ptt)
>> + auxtrace_event_cnt++;
>> +
>> if (auxtrace_event_cnt > 1) {
>> pr_err("Concurrent AUX trace operation not currently supported\n");
>> *err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> @@ -111,6 +171,9 @@ struct auxtrace_record
>> #if defined(__aarch64__)
>> if (found_spe)
>> return arm_spe_recording_init(err, found_spe);
>> +
>> + if (found_ptt)
>> + return hisi_ptt_recording_init(err, found_ptt);
>> #endif
>>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists