[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250711103657.0000059c@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 10:36:57 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@...wei.com>
CC: <krzk@...nel.org>, <robh@...nel.org>, <coresight@...ts.linaro.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <dianders@...omium.org>,
<james.clark@...aro.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
<linuxarm@...wei.com>, <mark.rutland@....com>, <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
<ruanjinjie@...wei.com>, <saravanak@...gle.com>,
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] perf/arm-dsu: refactor cpu id retrieval via new
API of_cpu_phandle_to_id
On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 16:15:02 +0100
Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@...wei.com> wrote:
> Update arm-dsu to use the new API, where both "cpus" and "cpu"
> properties are supported.
I'd gloss over that and just not mention support of "cpu" as
it never applies here and we just queried the number of phandles
for cpus a few lines up.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alireza Sanaee <alireza.sanaee@...wei.com>
> ---
> drivers/perf/arm_dsu_pmu.c | 8 ++------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_dsu_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_dsu_pmu.c
> index cb4fb59fe04b..1014b92c0fd2 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_dsu_pmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_dsu_pmu.c
> @@ -591,17 +591,13 @@ static struct dsu_pmu *dsu_pmu_alloc(struct platform_device *pdev)
> static int dsu_pmu_dt_get_cpus(struct device *dev, cpumask_t *mask)
> {
> int i = 0, n, cpu;
> - struct device_node *cpu_node;
>
> n = of_count_phandle_with_args(dev->of_node, "cpus", NULL);
> if (n <= 0)
> return -ENODEV;
> +
Stray change - it's a valid one for readability but not in this patch.
> for (; i < n; i++) {
> - cpu_node = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "cpus", i);
> - if (!cpu_node)
> - break;
> - cpu = of_cpu_node_to_id(cpu_node);
> - of_node_put(cpu_node);
> + cpu = of_cpu_phandle_to_id(dev->of_node, NULL, i);
> /*
> * We have to ignore the failures here and continue scanning
> * the list to handle cases where the nr_cpus could be capped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists