linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@arm.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc: mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
	coresight@lists.linaro.org, leo.yan@linaro.org,
	Sudeep.Holla@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	mike.leach@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coresight: etm4x: lazily allocate memory for save_state
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 12:24:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190726112444.GA56241@e119886-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88f1e83b-8f16-a5bf-d68e-b840a4302f90@arm.com>

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:05:37AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> 
> 
> On 22/07/2019 21:32, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> > 
> > Sorry for the late reply - you patch got lost under the pile.
> > 
> > On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 09:01, Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@arm.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > I had intended to lazily allocate memory for the save_state structure when
> > > it is first used. Following is a patch that I will squash into "[PATCH v3 5/6]
> > > coresight: etm4x: save/restore state across CPU low power states" on my
> > > next respin. I thought I'd share it here to get some feedback along with
> > > the rest of v3.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > Andrew Murray
> > > 
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.c | 14 +++++++++++---
> > >   drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h |  2 +-
> > >   2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.c
> > > index b0bd8158bf13..cd02372194bc 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.c
> > > @@ -1112,6 +1112,13 @@ static int etm4_cpu_save(struct etmv4_drvdata *drvdata)
> > >          struct etmv4_save_state *state;
> > >          struct device *etm_dev = &drvdata->csdev->dev;
> > > 
> > > +       if (!drvdata->save_state) {
> > > +               drvdata->save_state = devm_kmalloc(etm_dev,
> > > +                               sizeof(struct etmv4_save_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> > 
> > GFP_KERNEL may sleep and will not work in the context where
> > etm4_cpu_save() is called.
> 
> Thats right and it is not worth making this GFP_ATOMIC either. We could simply
> decide this at probe time or when the save_restore is modified dynamically via
> callbacks.

I think it is simpler to change this to GFP_ATOMIC and leave it where it is.

As pm_save_enable can change at run time, we can't rely solely on allocating
memory for this at probe time. We'd have to allocate memory in two places 1)
a module_parm_cb callback for when the pm_save_enable parameter changes at
run-time and 2) at probe time to find out the initial value of the
pm_save_enable which may be set by kernel command line.

As the module_parm_cb callback is file-static we wouldn't know which drvdata
to allocate the memory for. We could allocate it for any etmdrvdata member
that isn't NULL - but this seems to add a lot of complexity - is this worth
it to avoid a GFP_ATOMIC allocation? (If we fail the allocation we can return
NOTIFY_BAD and stop the PM event.)

Thanks,

Andrew Murray

> 
> Suzuki
> 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Mathieu
> > 
> > > +               if (!drvdata->save_state)
> > > +                       return -ENOMEM;
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > >          /*
> > >           * As recommended by 3.4.1 ("The procedure when powering down the PE")
> > >           * of ARM IHI 0064D
> > > @@ -1134,7 +1141,7 @@ static int etm4_cpu_save(struct etmv4_drvdata *drvdata)
> > >                  goto out;
> > >          }
> > > 
> > > -       state = &drvdata->save_state;
> > > +       state = drvdata->save_state;
> > > 
> > >          state->trcprgctlr = readl(drvdata->base + TRCPRGCTLR);
> > >          state->trcprocselr = readl(drvdata->base + TRCPROCSELR);
> > > @@ -1234,9 +1241,10 @@ static int etm4_cpu_save(struct etmv4_drvdata *drvdata)
> > >   static void etm4_cpu_restore(struct etmv4_drvdata *drvdata)
> > >   {
> > >          int i;
> > > -       struct etmv4_save_state *state;
> > > +       struct etmv4_save_state *state = drvdata->save_state;
> > > 
> > > -       state = &drvdata->save_state;
> > > +       if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!state))
> > > +               return;
> > > 
> > >          CS_UNLOCK(drvdata->base);
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h
> > > index c31634c64f87..a70cafbbb8cf 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h
> > > @@ -441,7 +441,7 @@ struct etmv4_drvdata {
> > >          bool                            atbtrig;
> > >          bool                            lpoverride;
> > >          struct etmv4_config             config;
> > > -       struct etmv4_save_state         save_state;
> > > +       struct etmv4_save_state         *save_state;
> > >          bool                            state_needs_restore;
> > >   };
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 2.21.0
> > > 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-26 11:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-11 16:01 [PATCH v3 0/6] coresight: etm4x: save/restore ETMv4 context across CPU low power states Andrew Murray
2019-07-11 16:01 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] coresight: etm4x: remove superfluous setting of os_unlock Andrew Murray
2019-07-11 16:01 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] coresight: etm4x: use explicit barriers on enable/disable Andrew Murray
2019-07-11 16:01 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] coresight: etm4x: use module_param instead of module_param_named Andrew Murray
2019-07-11 16:01 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] coresight: etm4x: improve clarity of etm4_os_unlock comment Andrew Murray
2019-07-11 16:01 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] coresight: etm4x: save/restore state across CPU low power states Andrew Murray
2019-07-12 15:00   ` [PATCH] coresight: etm4x: lazily allocate memory for save_state Andrew Murray
2019-07-22 20:32     ` Mathieu Poirier
2019-07-23  9:05       ` Suzuki K Poulose
2019-07-26 11:24         ` Andrew Murray [this message]
2019-07-30 10:15           ` Suzuki K Poulose
2019-07-15 14:22   ` [PATCH v3 5/6] coresight: etm4x: save/restore state across CPU low power states Mike Leach
2019-07-16 11:50     ` Andrew Murray
2019-07-16 14:43       ` Mike Leach
2019-07-15 23:04   ` Mathieu Poirier
2019-07-16 11:52     ` Andrew Murray
2019-07-11 16:01 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] dt-bindings: arm: coresight: Add support for coresight-needs-save-restore Andrew Murray

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190726112444.GA56241@e119886-lin.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=andrew.murray@arm.com \
    --cc=Sudeep.Holla@arm.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=coresight@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=leo.yan@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
    --cc=mike.leach@linaro.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).