[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240711102436.4432-5-Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 10:24:32 +0000
From: Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@....com>
To: <peterz@...radead.org>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <acme@...nel.org>,
<namhyung@...nel.org>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, <jolsa@...nel.org>,
<irogers@...gle.com>, <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
<tglx@...utronix.de>, <bp@...en8.de>, <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
<x86@...nel.org>, <kees@...nel.org>, <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
<rui.zhang@...el.com>, <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
CC: <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, <ananth.narayan@....com>,
<gautham.shenoy@....com>, <kprateek.nayak@....com>, <ravi.bangoria@....com>,
<sandipan.das@....com>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
<Dhananjay.Ugwekar@....com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 04/11] perf/x86/rapl: Make rapl_model struct global
To support AMD's per_core RAPL counter, we will need to check
per_core capability of the current rapl_model multiple times in
rapl_cpu_online/offline, init_rapl_pmus functions, so cache the
matched rapl model in a global variable, to avoid calling
x86_match_cpu() multiple times.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@....com>
---
arch/x86/events/rapl.c | 16 ++++++++--------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/rapl.c b/arch/x86/events/rapl.c
index c3afeaf679c2..4ee0877eb4d8 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/rapl.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/rapl.c
@@ -146,6 +146,7 @@ static cpumask_t rapl_cpu_mask;
static unsigned int rapl_cntr_mask;
static u64 rapl_timer_ms;
static struct perf_msr *rapl_msrs;
+static struct rapl_model *rapl_model;
/*
* Helper functions to get the correct topology macros according to the
@@ -621,18 +622,18 @@ static int rapl_cpu_online(unsigned int cpu)
return 0;
}
-static int rapl_check_hw_unit(struct rapl_model *rm)
+static int rapl_check_hw_unit(void)
{
u64 msr_rapl_power_unit_bits;
int i;
/* protect rdmsrl() to handle virtualization */
- if (rdmsrl_safe(rm->msr_power_unit, &msr_rapl_power_unit_bits))
+ if (rdmsrl_safe(rapl_model->msr_power_unit, &msr_rapl_power_unit_bits))
return -1;
for (i = 0; i < NR_RAPL_DOMAINS; i++)
rapl_hw_unit[i] = (msr_rapl_power_unit_bits >> 8) & 0x1FULL;
- switch (rm->unit_quirk) {
+ switch (rapl_model->unit_quirk) {
/*
* DRAM domain on HSW server and KNL has fixed energy unit which can be
* different than the unit from power unit MSR. See
@@ -846,21 +847,20 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, rapl_model_match);
static int __init rapl_pmu_init(void)
{
const struct x86_cpu_id *id;
- struct rapl_model *rm;
int ret;
id = x86_match_cpu(rapl_model_match);
if (!id)
return -ENODEV;
- rm = (struct rapl_model *) id->driver_data;
+ rapl_model = (struct rapl_model *) id->driver_data;
- rapl_msrs = rm->rapl_msrs;
+ rapl_msrs = rapl_model->rapl_msrs;
rapl_cntr_mask = perf_msr_probe(rapl_msrs, PERF_RAPL_MAX,
- false, (void *) &rm->events);
+ false, (void *) &rapl_model->events);
- ret = rapl_check_hw_unit(rm);
+ ret = rapl_check_hw_unit();
if (ret)
return ret;
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists