Message-ID: <edfd1a85-772d-01e1-12a1-61dcc1cc2068@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 13 Jul 2023 17:37:57 +0100
From:   Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
To:     Tao Zhang <quic_taozha@...cinc.com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Jinlong Mao <quic_jinlmao@...cinc.com>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>, coresight@...ts.linaro.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Tingwei Zhang <quic_tingweiz@...cinc.com>,
        Yuanfang Zhang <quic_yuanfang@...cinc.com>,
        Trilok Soni <quic_tsoni@...cinc.com>,
        Hao Zhang <quic_hazha@...cinc.com>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, andersson@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 09/13] Add nodes for dsb edge control

On 13/07/2023 17:13, Tao Zhang wrote:
> 
> On 7/13/2023 5:34 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 13/07/2023 09:54, Mike Leach wrote:
>>> HI Tao,
>>>
>>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 at 14:53, Tao Zhang <quic_taozha@...cinc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 6/20/2023 9:41 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>>> On 20/06/2023 09:31, Tao Zhang wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/20/2023 3:37 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 03:32:37PM +0800, Tao Zhang wrote:
>>>>>>>> Add the nodes to set value for DSB edge control and DSB edge
>>>>>>>> control mask. Each DSB subunit TPDM has maximum of n(n<16) EDCR
>>>>>>>> resgisters to configure edge control. DSB edge detection control
>>>>>>>> 00: Rising edge detection
>>>>>>>> 01: Falling edge detection
>>>>>>>> 10: Rising and falling edge detection (toggle detection)
>>>>>>>> And each DSB subunit TPDM has maximum of m(m<8) ECDMR registers to
>>>>>>>> configure mask. Eight 32 bit registers providing DSB interface
>>>>>>>> edge detection mask control.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tao Zhang <quic_taozha@...cinc.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>    .../ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-coresight-devices-tpdm |  32 +++++
>>>>>>>>    drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-tpdm.c | 143
>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>>>>>>    drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-tpdm.h |  22 ++++
>>>>>>>>    3 files changed, 196 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git
>>>>>>>> a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-coresight-devices-tpdm
>>>>>>>> b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-coresight-devices-tpdm
>>>>>>>> index 2a82cd0..34189e4a 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-coresight-devices-tpdm
>>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-coresight-devices-tpdm
>>>>>>>> @@ -60,3 +60,35 @@ Description:
>>>>>>>>            Bit[3] : Set to 0 for low performance mode.
>>>>>>>>                     Set to 1 for high performance mode.
>>>>>>>>            Bit[4:8] : Select byte lane for high performance mode.
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +What: /sys/bus/coresight/devices/<tpdm-name>/dsb_edge_ctrl
>>>>>>>> +Date:        March 2023
>>>>>>>> +KernelVersion    6.5
>>>>>>>> +Contact:    Jinlong Mao (QUIC) <quic_jinlmao@...cinc.com>, Tao
>>>>>>>> Zhang (QUIC) <quic_taozha@...cinc.com>
>>>>>>>> +Description:
>>>>>>>> +        Read/Write a set of the edge control registers of the DSB
>>>>>>>> +        in TPDM.
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +        Expected format is the following:
>>>>>>>> +        <integer1> <integer2> <integer3>
>>>>>>> sysfs is "one value", not 3.  Please never have to parse a sysfs 
>>>>>>> file.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean sysfs file can only accept "one value"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see that more than one value are written to the sysfs file
>>>>>> "trigout_attach".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +static ssize_t dsb_edge_ctrl_show(struct device *dev,
>>>>>>>> +                       struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>>>>>> +                       char *buf)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> +    struct tpdm_drvdata *drvdata = dev_get_drvdata(dev->parent);
>>>>>>>> +    ssize_t size = 0;
>>>>>>>> +    unsigned long bytes;
>>>>>>>> +    int i;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +    spin_lock(&drvdata->spinlock);
>>>>>>>> +    for (i = 0; i < TPDM_DSB_MAX_EDCR; i++) {
>>>>>>>> +        bytes = sysfs_emit_at(buf, size,
>>>>>>>> +                  "Index:0x%x Val:0x%x\n", i,
>>>>>>> Again, no, one value, no "string" needed to parse anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also see other sysfs files can be read more than one value in other
>>>>>> drivers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this "one value" limitation the usage rule of Linux sysfs system?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or am I misunderstanding what you mean?
>>>>>
>>>>> Please fix the other sysfs tunables in the following patches.
>>>>
>>>> List a new solution for the similar cases below, please see if this
>>>> design is reasonable?
>>>>
>>>> 1. Two SysFS files("dsb_edge_ctrl_idx" and "dsb_edge_ctrl_val") will be
>>>> created in this case.
>>>>
>>>> 2. First write to the node "dsb_edge_ctrl_idx" to set the index number
>>>> of the edge detection.
>>>>
>>>> 3. Then write to the node "dsb_edge_ctrl_val" to set the value of the
>>>> edge detection.
>>>>
>>>> For example, if we need need to set "Falling edge detection" to the 
>>>> edge
>>>> detection #220-#222, we can issue the following commands.
>>>>
>>>> echo 0xdc > tpdm1/dsb_edge_ctrl_idx
>>>>
>>>> echo 0x1 > tpdm1/dsb_edge_ctrl_val
>>>>
>>>> echo 0xdd > tpdm1/dsb_edge_ctrl_idx
>>>>
>>>> echo 0x1 > tpdm1/dsb_edge_ctrl_val
>>>>
>>>> echo 0xde > tpdm1/dsb_edge_ctrl_idx
>>>>
>>>> echo 0x1 > tpdm1/dsb_edge_ctrl_val
>>>>
>>>> If this design is acceptable, we will rewrite other similar nodes based
>>>> on this solution.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This index / value model is used in the coresight drivers so should be
>>> OK - eg etm4 has cntr_idx / cntrldvr / cntr_val / cntr_ctrl, where
>>> index selects the counter, and the other val registers are applied to
>>> that counter.
>>
>> True. That model is useful when there are variable number of "counters".
>> I guess it doesn't hurt to have a 64bit (or even 32bit) file for each
>> EDCR.
>>
>> e.g, edcr0...edcr15
>>
>> Given there are only 16 of them, it is fine to keep a file for each.
>> This may be grouped under "mgmt" similar to what we have for other
>> components. That way, it can be easily hidden by checking for the
>> presence of DSB.
> 
> The number of EDCR registers is not fixed. The maximum range is [0:15].
> 
> But the address of the maximum number of the registers will be reserved 
> first,
> 
> and can be accessed safely even if the TPDM doesn't have the maximum number
> 
> of  EDCR registers.
> 
> And we are not able to dynamically know the number of EDCR registers per 
> DSB
> 
> TPDM.
> 
> Can we use our proposal in this case?

Please provide a file edcrN for each of the 0 <= N < 16. That way it is
easier to avoid locking the index. It doesn't matter how many EDCRs are
supported, there is a maximum limit and it is always guaranteed to be
write safe, if some are not implemented. Thus it is much easier from a 
programming perspective too.

Suzuki



> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> Tao
> 
>>
>> Suzuki
>>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists