[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tencent_49E156C63C84E435E6F16509D6699339520A@qq.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:27:28 +0800
From: Yangyu Chen <cyy@...self.name>
To: conor@...nel.org
Cc: ajones@...tanamicro.com,
anup@...infault.org,
aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
atishp@...shpatra.org,
conor.dooley@...rochip.com,
dqfext@...il.com,
guoren@...nel.org,
heiko@...ech.de,
inochiama@...look.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
mark.rutland@....com,
palmer@...belt.com,
paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: RISC-V: fix IRQ detection on T-Head C908
>> IMHO, it may be better to use a new DT property like "riscv,cpu-errata" or
>> "<vendor>,cpu-errata". It can achieve almost everything like using pseudo
>> isa. And the only cost I think is a small amount code to parse this.
>
> I suppose we could do that, but accounting for vendor specifics was one
> of the goals for the property I only just added and that I am suggesting
> to use here.
I think there is a simpler way to do that. We use T-Head PMU by default
for All T-Head CPUs (from mvendor id). Then, to test there is sscofpmf in
the ISA string being probed by the kernel. If yes, then use scofpmf.
Otherwise, use T-Head PMU.
I will check if this can also be switched in any vendor CSR like Svpbmt and
T-Head MAE we discussed before.
Thanks,
Yangyu Chen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists