[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250616160811.GA794930@e132581.arm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 17:08:11 +0100
From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@....com>
To: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...wei.com>
Cc: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
yangyicong@...ilicon.com, James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Ali Saidi <alisaidi@...zon.com>, Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
yangjinqian <yangjinqian1@...wei.com>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: perf usage of arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h
On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 11:04:08PM +0800, Yicong Yang wrote:
[...]
> >> +static bool is_perf_midr_in_range_list(u32 midr, struct midr_range
> >> const *ranges)
> >> +{
> >> + while (ranges->model) {
> >> + if (midr_is_cpu_model_range(midr, ranges->model,
> >> + ranges->rv_min, ranges->rv_max)) {
> >> + return true;
> >> + }
> >> + ranges++;
> >> + }
> >> + return false;
> >> +}
> >
> > Maybe we can make it more general. For example, move this function into
> > a common header such as tools/perf/arch/arm64/include/cputype.h. Then,
> > util/arm-spe.c can include this header.
> >
>
> ok this sounds just like as before except rename the midr check function and modify the
> users in perf. will do in below steps:
> - move cpu_errata_set_target_impl()/is_midr_in_range_list() out of cputype.h
> since they're only used in the kernel with errata information
> - introduce is_target_midr_in_range_list() in cputype.h to test certain MIDR
> is within the ranges. (is_perf_midr_in_range_list() only make sense in
> userspace and is a bit strange to me in a kernel header). maybe reimplement
> is_midr_in_range_list() with is_target_midr_in_range_list() otherwise there's
> no users in kernel
> - copy cputype.h to userspace and make users use new is_target_midr_in_range_list()
>
> this will avoid touching the kernel too much and userspace don't need to implement
> a separate function.
My understanding is we don't need to touch anything in kernel side, we
simply add a wrapper in perf tool to call midr_is_cpu_model_range().
When introduce is_target_midr_in_range_list() in kernel's cputype.h,
if no consumers in kernel use it and only useful for perf tool, then
it is unlikely to be accepted.
Thanks,
Leo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists