Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 13:46:51 +0000
From: Gowthami Thiagarajan <gthiagarajan@...vell.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
CC: "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@....com"
	<mark.rutland@....com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>,
        Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@...vell.com>,
        George Cherian <gcherian@...vell.com>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] perf/marvell: Odyssey DDR Performance
 monitor support

Hi Jonathan,

Please find the response inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2024 5:35 PM
> To: Gowthami Thiagarajan <gthiagarajan@...vell.com>
> Cc: will@...nel.org; mark.rutland@....com; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>; Bharat Bhushan
> <bbhushan2@...vell.com>; George Cherian <gcherian@...vell.com>
> Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] perf/marvell: Odyssey DDR Performance monitor support
> 
> External Email
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:19:32 +0530
> Gowthami Thiagarajan <gthiagarajan@...vell.com> wrote:
> 
> > Odyssey DRAM Subsystem supports eight counters for monitoring performance
> > and software can program those counters to monitor any of the defined
> > performance events. Supported performance events include those counted
> > at the interface between the DDR controller and the PHY, interface between
> > the DDR Controller and the CHI interconnect, or within the DDR Controller.
> >
> > Additionally DSS also supports two fixed performance event counters, one
> > for ddr reads and the other for ddr writes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gowthami Thiagarajan <gthiagarajan@...vell.com>
> Hi Gowthami,
> 
> A quick drive by review.
> Questions like whether this patch should be split are down to the perf maintainers.
> I would ask for it, but not my area of the kernel ;)
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> > +#define VERSION_V1				1
> > +#define VERSION_V2				2
> 
> Prefix these defines + perhaps make them an enum?
[Gowthami] Ack.
> 
> > +
> >  struct cn10k_ddr_pmu {
> >  	struct pmu pmu;
> >  	void __iomem *base;
> > +	struct ddr_pmu_platform_data *p_data;
> 
> const both because it should be and to avoid casting away the const.
[Gowthami] Ack. 
> 
> 
> > +	int version;
> >  	unsigned int cpu;
> >  	struct	device *dev;
> >  	int active_events;
> > @@ -134,6 +160,54 @@ struct cn10k_ddr_pmu {
> >
> >  #define to_cn10k_ddr_pmu(p)	container_of(p, struct cn10k_ddr_pmu, pmu)
> >
> > +struct ddr_pmu_platform_data {
> > +	u64 counter_overflow_val;
> > +	u64 counter_max_val;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_base;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cfg_base;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_op_mode_ctrl;
> 
> Good to name these in a fashion that makes it clear what they are.
> Some are values, some are register address offsets I think?
> 
> Shy is ddrc_perf prefix useful in here?
[Gowthami] Yes. Some are values and most of them point to register offsets.
Just to match with the register defined values named it so.
> 
> 
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_start_op_ctrl;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_end_op_ctrl;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_end_status;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_en;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_ctrl;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_clr;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_value_wr_op;
> > +	u64 ddrc_perf_cnt_value_rd_op;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct ddr_pmu_platform_data cn10k_ddr_pmu_pdata = {
> > +	.counter_overflow_val =  BIT_ULL(48),
> > +	.counter_max_val = GENMASK_ULL(48, 0),
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_base = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_VALUE_BASE,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cfg_base = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CFG_BASE,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_op_mode_ctrl = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_OP_MODE_CTRL,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_start_op_ctrl = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_START_OP_CTRL,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_end_op_ctrl = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_END_OP_CTRL,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_end_status = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_END_STATUS,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_en = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_FREERUN_EN,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_ctrl = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_FREERUN_CTRL,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_clr = 0,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_value_wr_op = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_VALUE_WR_OP,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_value_rd_op = CN10K_DDRC_PERF_CNT_VALUE_RD_OP,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct ddr_pmu_platform_data odyssey_ddr_pmu_pdata = {
> > +	.counter_overflow_val = 0,
> > +	.counter_max_val = GENMASK_ULL(63, 0),
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_base = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_VALUE_BASE,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cfg_base = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CFG_BASE,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_op_mode_ctrl = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_OP_MODE_CTRL,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_start_op_ctrl = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_START_OP_CTRL,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_end_op_ctrl = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_END_OP_CTRL,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_end_status = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_END_STATUS,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_en = 0,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_ctrl = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_FREERUN_CTRL,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_freerun_clr = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_FREERUN_CLR,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_value_wr_op = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_VALUE_WR_OP,
> > +	.ddrc_perf_cnt_value_rd_op = ODY_DDRC_PERF_CNT_VALUE_RD_OP,
> > +};
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> > -static int ddr_perf_get_event_bitmap(int eventid, u64 *event_bitmap)
> > +static int ddr_perf_get_event_bitmap(int eventid, u64 *event_bitmap,
> > +				     struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *ddr_pmu)
> >  {
> > +	int ret = 0;
> > +
> >  	switch (eventid) {
> >  	case EVENT_HIF_RD_OR_WR ... EVENT_WAW_HAZARD:
> >  	case EVENT_OP_IS_REFRESH ... EVENT_OP_IS_ZQLATCH:
> >  		*event_bitmap = (1ULL << (eventid - 1));
> >  		break;
> > +	case EVENT_DFI_PARITY_POISON ...EVENT_DFI_CMD_IS_RETRY:
> > +		if (ddr_pmu->version == VERSION_V2) {
> > +			*event_bitmap = (1ULL << (eventid - 1));
> > +		} else {
> > +			pr_err("%s Invalid eventid %d\n", __func__, eventid);
> > +			ret = -EINVAL;
> > +		}
> > +		break;
> >  	case EVENT_OP_IS_ENTER_SELFREF:
> >  	case EVENT_OP_IS_ENTER_POWERDOWN:
> >  	case EVENT_OP_IS_ENTER_MPSM:
> > @@ -280,10 +451,10 @@ static int ddr_perf_get_event_bitmap(int eventid, u64 *event_bitmap)
> >  		break;
> >  	default:
> >  		pr_err("%s Invalid eventid %d\n", __func__, eventid);
> > -		return -EINVAL;
> > +		ret = -EINVAL;
> >  	}
> >
> > -	return 0;
> > +	return ret;
> Why?  Just return in the various paths above.
> 
> Direct returns make for easier to review code as you can follow a particular path through
> more quickly.
[Gowthami] Ack. 
> 
> >  }
> 
> >  static void cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu)
> >  {
> >  	struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *ddr_pmu = to_cn10k_ddr_pmu(pmu);
> > +	struct ddr_pmu_platform_data *p_data = ddr_pmu->p_data;
> >
> >  	writeq_relaxed(END_OP_CTRL_VAL_END, ddr_pmu->base +
> > -		       DDRC_PERF_CNT_END_OP_CTRL);
> > +		       p_data->ddrc_perf_cnt_end_op_ctrl);
> >  }
> >
> >  static void cn10k_ddr_perf_event_update_all(struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *pmu)
> > @@ -549,6 +778,7 @@ static void cn10k_ddr_perf_event_update_all(struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *pmu)
> >
> >  static irqreturn_t cn10k_ddr_pmu_overflow_handler(struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *pmu)
> >  {
> > +	struct ddr_pmu_platform_data *p_data = pmu->p_data;
> >  	struct perf_event *event;
> >  	struct hw_perf_event *hwc;
> >  	u64 prev_count, new_count;
> > @@ -561,7 +791,8 @@ static irqreturn_t cn10k_ddr_pmu_overflow_handler(struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *pmu)
> >  		prev_count = local64_read(&hwc->prev_count);
> >  		new_count = cn10k_ddr_perf_read_counter(pmu, hwc->idx);
> >
> > -		/* Overflow condition is when new count less than
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Overflow condition is when new count less than
> >  		 * previous count
> >  		 */
> >  		if (new_count < prev_count)
> > @@ -574,7 +805,8 @@ static irqreturn_t cn10k_ddr_pmu_overflow_handler(struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *pmu)
> >  		prev_count = local64_read(&hwc->prev_count);
> >  		new_count = cn10k_ddr_perf_read_counter(pmu, hwc->idx);
> >
> > -		/* Overflow condition is when new count less than
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Overflow condition is when new count less than
> 
> Good to fix this, but not in a patch doing anything meaningful. If you want
> to make comment syntax changes - separate patch.
[Gowthami] Ack.
> 
> >  		 * previous count
> >  		 */
> >  		if (new_count < prev_count)
> > @@ -586,11 +818,23 @@ static irqreturn_t cn10k_ddr_pmu_overflow_handler(struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *pmu)
> >  			continue;
> >
> >  		value = cn10k_ddr_perf_read_counter(pmu, i);
> > -		if (value == DDRC_PERF_CNT_MAX_VALUE) {
> > +		if (value == p_data->counter_max_val) {
> >  			pr_info("Counter-(%d) reached max value\n", i);
> > -			cn10k_ddr_perf_event_update_all(pmu);
> > -			cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_disable(&pmu->pmu);
> > -			cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_enable(&pmu->pmu);
> > +			/*
> > +			 * As separate control register is added for each
> > +			 * counter in odyssey, no need to update all
> > +			 * the events
> > +			 */
> > +			if (pmu->version == VERSION_V2) {
> 
> This sort of version difference is often better handled via a callback
> in the your pdata structure.  Makes it easy to add a new one for v3 :)
> 
[Gowthami] Agree. Will make the change in the next version. 
> > +				cn10k_ddr_perf_event_update(pmu->events[i]);
> > +				cn10k_ddr_perf_counter_stop(pmu, i);
> > +				cn10k_ddr_perf_counter_start(pmu, i);
> > +
> > +			} else {
> > +				cn10k_ddr_perf_event_update_all(pmu);
> > +				cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_disable(&pmu->pmu);
> > +				cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_enable(&pmu->pmu);
> > +			}
> >  		}
> >  	}
> >
> > @@ -631,7 +875,10 @@ static int cn10k_ddr_pmu_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node)
> >
> >  static int cn10k_ddr_perf_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  {
> > +	struct ddr_pmu_platform_data *pltfm_data;
> > +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> >  	struct cn10k_ddr_pmu *ddr_pmu;
> > +	const char  *compatible;
> >  	struct resource *res;
> >  	void __iomem *base;
> >  	char *name;
> > @@ -642,6 +889,14 @@ static int cn10k_ddr_perf_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >  	ddr_pmu->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +
> > +	pltfm_data = (struct ddr_pmu_platform_data *)
> > +		      device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
> 
> Shouldn't need the cast as it's a const void *
> and you should not need to modify it in here (so make your
> data types
> const struct ddr_pmu_platform *
> 
[Gowthami] Ack 
> 
> 
> > +	if (!pltfm_data) {
> > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Error: No device match data found\n");
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +	}
> > +	ddr_pmu->p_data = pltfm_data;
> >  	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ddr_pmu);
> >
> >  	base = devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0, &res);
> > @@ -650,25 +905,59 @@ static int cn10k_ddr_perf_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >
> >  	ddr_pmu->base = base;
> >
> > -	/* Setup the PMU counter to work in manual mode */
> > -	writeq_relaxed(OP_MODE_CTRL_VAL_MANNUAL, ddr_pmu->base +
> > -		       DDRC_PERF_CNT_OP_MODE_CTRL);
> > -
> > -	ddr_pmu->pmu = (struct pmu) {
> > -		.module	      = THIS_MODULE,
> > -		.capabilities = PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_EXCLUDE,
> > -		.task_ctx_nr = perf_invalid_context,
> > -		.attr_groups = cn10k_attr_groups,
> > -		.event_init  = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_init,
> > -		.add	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_add,
> > -		.del	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_del,
> > -		.start	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_start,
> > -		.stop	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_stop,
> > -		.read	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_update,
> > -		.pmu_enable  = cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_enable,
> > -		.pmu_disable = cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_disable,
> > -	};
> > +	ret = device_property_read_string(dev, "compatible", &compatible);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		pr_err("compatible property not found\n");
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> >
> > +	if ((strncmp("marvell,cn10k-ddr-pmu", compatible,
> > +		     strlen(compatible)) == 0))
> 
> Why not just embed this in your pdata structure?
> Even better would be add data to reflect the actual differences
> rather than relying on a 'version' number.  It tends to be more
> extensible as new implementations surface to encode each difference
> as data in such a structure.  Otherwise, in the long run you
> end up with big switch statements for the many different versions
> which just provide some per version constants.  That's messy.
[Gowthami] Ack.
> 
> 
> > +		ddr_pmu->version = VERSION_V1;
> > +	else
> > +		ddr_pmu->version = VERSION_V2;
> > +
> > +	if (ddr_pmu->version == VERSION_V1) {
> > +		ddr_pmu->pmu = (struct pmu) {
> > +			.module	      = THIS_MODULE,
> > +			.capabilities = PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_EXCLUDE,
> > +			.task_ctx_nr = perf_invalid_context,
> > +			.attr_groups = cn10k_attr_groups,
> > +			.event_init  = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_init,
> > +			.add	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_add,
> > +			.del	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_del,
> > +			.start	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_start,
> > +			.stop	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_stop,
> > +			.read	     = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_update,
> > +			.pmu_enable  = cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_enable,
> > +			.pmu_disable = cn10k_ddr_perf_pmu_disable,
> > +		};
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * As we have separate control registers for each counter in Odyssey,
> > +	 * setting up the mode will be done when we enable each counter
> > +	 *
> 
> Trivial: Odd formatting. I'd drop the blank commented line and add a full stop.
[Gowthami] Ack
> 
> > +	 */
> > +
> > +	/* Setup the PMU counter to work in manual mode */
> > +		writeq(OP_MODE_CTRL_VAL_MANUAL, ddr_pmu->base +
> > +		      (ddr_pmu->p_data->ddrc_perf_cnt_op_mode_ctrl));
> > +	} else {
> > +		ddr_pmu->pmu = (struct pmu) {
> > +			.module       = THIS_MODULE,
> > +			.capabilities = PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_EXCLUDE,
> > +			.task_ctx_nr = perf_invalid_context,
> > +			.attr_groups = odyssey_attr_groups,
> > +			.event_init  = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_init,
> > +			.add         = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_add,
> > +			.del         = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_del,
> > +			.start       = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_start,
> > +			.stop        = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_stop,
> > +			.read        = cn10k_ddr_perf_event_update,
> > +			.pmu_enable  = NULL,
> > +			.pmu_disable = NULL,
> 
> No need to set these to NULL.  Not providing them has same result and
> I don't think there is any particular value wrt to 'documentation' of
> setting them explicitly.  If there is a reason this needs calling out
> I'd expect a comment explaining why.
[Gowthami] There is no specific reason. Will remove it in the next version.
> 
> Ideal patch series structure for changes like this patch makes would be:
> 1) Refactor to pull out the pdata - no functional change.
> 2) Patch adding the support for the new device.
> 
> Result is easier to review than the combination of the two changes.
[Gowthami] Agree. Will split the patch as suggested.

Thanks,
Gowthami
> 
> 
> > +		};
> > +	}

Powered by blists - more mailing lists