All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@nxp.com>, <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	<linux-imx@nxp.com>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 RESEND 1/3] perf/imx_ddr: Add system PMU identifier for userspace
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 15:16:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <04e6ed82-d33e-9153-eeab-29986ccf8e1e@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200521132641.GB47848@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>

On 21/05/2020 14:26, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:33:04AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 12:51:25PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:31:13PM +0800, Joakim Zhang wrote:
>>>> +static ssize_t ddr_perf_identifier_show(struct device *dev,
>>>> +					struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>> +					char *page)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct ddr_pmu *pmu = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>> +
>>>> +	return sprintf(page, "%s\n", pmu->devtype_data->identifier);
>>>
>>> Why do we need yet another way to identify the SoC from userspace?
>>
>> I also really dislike this. What's the preferred way to identify the SoC
>> from userspace? It's needed so that the perf userspace tool can describe
>> perf events that are supported for the PMU, as this isn't probe-able
>> directly from the hardware. We have the same issue with the SMMUv3 PMCG [1],
>> and so we need to solve the problem for both DT and ACPI.
> 
> Worth noting that while in this case it happens to identify the SoC,
> in general you can have distinct instances of system IP in a single
> system, so I do think that we need *something* instance-specific, even
> if that's combined with SoC info.
> 

Hi Mark,

> Where IP gets reused across SoCs, it makes sense for that to not depend
> on top-level SoC info.

This would be quite an uncommon case. Generally most instances of a 
given PMU in a SoC would be identical implementations.

And anyway, we should be able to solve that problem in perf tool, as 
long as the PMU device name is fixed. Like what we have for the SMMUv3 
PMU, where the device name contains the device bus address, i.e don't 
use idr for perf drivers device naming....

Thanks,
John

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@nxp.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-imx@nxp.com,
	shawnguo@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 RESEND 1/3] perf/imx_ddr: Add system PMU identifier for userspace
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 15:16:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <04e6ed82-d33e-9153-eeab-29986ccf8e1e@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200521132641.GB47848@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>

On 21/05/2020 14:26, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:33:04AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 12:51:25PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:31:13PM +0800, Joakim Zhang wrote:
>>>> +static ssize_t ddr_perf_identifier_show(struct device *dev,
>>>> +					struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>> +					char *page)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct ddr_pmu *pmu = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>> +
>>>> +	return sprintf(page, "%s\n", pmu->devtype_data->identifier);
>>>
>>> Why do we need yet another way to identify the SoC from userspace?
>>
>> I also really dislike this. What's the preferred way to identify the SoC
>> from userspace? It's needed so that the perf userspace tool can describe
>> perf events that are supported for the PMU, as this isn't probe-able
>> directly from the hardware. We have the same issue with the SMMUv3 PMCG [1],
>> and so we need to solve the problem for both DT and ACPI.
> 
> Worth noting that while in this case it happens to identify the SoC,
> in general you can have distinct instances of system IP in a single
> system, so I do think that we need *something* instance-specific, even
> if that's combined with SoC info.
> 

Hi Mark,

> Where IP gets reused across SoCs, it makes sense for that to not depend
> on top-level SoC info.

This would be quite an uncommon case. Generally most instances of a 
given PMU in a SoC would be identical implementations.

And anyway, we should be able to solve that problem in perf tool, as 
long as the PMU device name is fixed. Like what we have for the SMMUv3 
PMU, where the device name contains the device bus address, i.e don't 
use idr for perf drivers device naming....

Thanks,
John

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

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-21 14:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-12  7:31 [PATCH V1 RESEND 0/3] perf/imx_ddr: Add system PMU support Joakim Zhang
2020-05-12  7:31 ` Joakim Zhang
2020-05-12  7:31 ` [PATCH V1 RESEND 1/3] perf/imx_ddr: Add system PMU identifier for userspace Joakim Zhang
2020-05-12  7:31   ` Joakim Zhang
2020-05-19 18:51   ` Rob Herring
2020-05-19 18:51     ` Rob Herring
2020-05-20  2:56     ` Joakim Zhang
2020-05-20  2:56       ` Joakim Zhang
2020-05-20 15:10       ` Rob Herring
2020-05-20 15:10         ` Rob Herring
2020-05-20  7:33     ` Will Deacon
2020-05-20  7:33       ` Will Deacon
2020-05-20 15:23       ` Rob Herring
2020-05-20 15:23         ` Rob Herring
2020-05-21 13:04         ` Will Deacon
2020-05-21 13:04           ` Will Deacon
2020-05-21 14:00           ` John Garry
2020-05-21 14:00             ` John Garry
2020-05-27 14:34             ` John Garry
2020-05-27 14:34               ` John Garry
2020-05-28  1:35               ` Shaokun Zhang
2020-05-28  1:35                 ` Shaokun Zhang
2020-05-21 13:26       ` Mark Rutland
2020-05-21 13:26         ` Mark Rutland
2020-05-21 14:16         ` John Garry [this message]
2020-05-21 14:16           ` John Garry
2020-05-12  7:31 ` [PATCH V1 RESEND 2/3] bindings/perf/imx-ddr: update compatible string Joakim Zhang
2020-05-12  7:31   ` Joakim Zhang
2020-05-19 18:47   ` Rob Herring
2020-05-19 18:47     ` Rob Herring
2020-07-15 11:03   ` John Garry
2020-07-15 11:03     ` John Garry
2020-07-20  8:57     ` Joakim Zhang
2020-07-20  8:57       ` Joakim Zhang
2020-05-12  7:31 ` [PATCH V1 RESEND 3/3] arch: arm64: imx8mq/m/n: remove unused " Joakim Zhang
2020-05-12  7:31   ` Joakim Zhang

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=04e6ed82-d33e-9153-eeab-29986ccf8e1e@huawei.com \
    --to=john.garry@huawei.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=qiangqing.zhang@nxp.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.