linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 14/14] platform/x86: hfi: Add debugfs support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <7b3a2e3b-9c37-09a3-238a-9cc90726c929@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 15:38:36 +0300 (EEST)
From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, 
    x86@...nel.org, "Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>, 
    Perry Yuan <perry.yuan@....com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
    linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, 
    platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, 
    Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 14/14] platform/x86: hfi: Add debugfs support

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024, Mario Limonciello wrote:

> Add a dump of the class and capabilities table to debugfs to assist
> with debugging scheduler issues.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
> ---
> v2->v3:
>   * New patch
> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c
> index 6c90b50f0a40..6df80f6ac73c 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/hfi/hfi.c
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
>  #include <linux/acpi.h>
>  #include <linux/cpu.h>
>  #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> +#include <linux/debugfs.h>
>  #include <linux/gfp.h>
>  #include <linux/init.h>
>  #include <linux/io.h>
> @@ -79,6 +80,8 @@ struct amd_hfi_data {
>  	void __iomem		*pcc_comm_addr;
>  	struct acpi_subtable_header	*pcct_entry;
>  	struct amd_shmem_info	*shmem;
> +
> +	struct dentry *dbgfs_dir;
>  };
>  
>  /**
> @@ -243,6 +246,8 @@ static void amd_hfi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>  	struct amd_hfi_data *dev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>  
> +	debugfs_remove_recursive(dev->dbgfs_dir);
> +
>  	mutex_destroy(&dev->lock);
>  }
>  
> @@ -400,6 +405,28 @@ static int amd_hfi_metadata_parser(struct platform_device *pdev,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int class_capabilities_show(struct seq_file *s, void *unused)
> +{
> +	int cpu, idx;
> +
> +	seq_puts(s, "CPU #\tWLC\tPerf\tEff\n");
> +	for_each_present_cpu(cpu) {
> +		struct amd_hfi_cpuinfo *hfi_cpuinfo = per_cpu_ptr(&amd_hfi_cpuinfo, cpu);
> +
> +		seq_printf(s, "%d\t", cpu);
> +		for (idx = 0; idx < hfi_cpuinfo->nr_class; idx++) {
> +			seq_printf(s, "%s%d\t%d\t%d\n",
> +				   idx == 0 ? "" : "\t",

Is this conditional printing really required? Why cannot you just print \t 
always here and remove it from the cpu print line?

-- 
 i.

> +				   idx,
> +				   hfi_cpuinfo->amd_hfi_classes[idx].perf,
> +				   hfi_cpuinfo->amd_hfi_classes[idx].eff);
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(class_capabilities);
> +
>  static int amd_hfi_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
>  {
>  	int ret, cpu;
> @@ -473,6 +500,10 @@ static int amd_hfi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	schedule_work(&sched_amd_hfi_itmt_work);
>  
> +	amd_hfi_data->dbgfs_dir = debugfs_create_dir("amd_hfi", arch_debugfs_dir);
> +	debugfs_create_file("class_capabilities", 0644, amd_hfi_data->dbgfs_dir, pdev,
> +			    &class_capabilities_fops);
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
>