From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf: arm_spe: Enable ACPI/Platform automatic module loading Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:50:55 +0100 Message-ID: <20190416135055.GA3313@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20190326223938.5365-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <20190326223938.5365-5-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <20190404170423.GC28932@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> <065cc8ae-f2c0-e493-b0a6-5c7340db37f5@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <065cc8ae-f2c0-e493-b0a6-5c7340db37f5@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jeremy Linton Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, linuxarm@huawei.com List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 12:24:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > On 4/4/19 12:04 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 05:39:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > > Lets add the MODULE_TABLE and platform id_table entries so that > > > the SPE driver can attach to the ACPI platform device created by > > > the core pmu code. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton > > > Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla > > > --- > > > drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 11 +++++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > > > index 7cb766dafe85..ffa2c76c08bb 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > > > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > > > @@ -1176,7 +1176,13 @@ static const struct of_device_id arm_spe_pmu_of_match[] = { > > > }; > > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, arm_spe_pmu_of_match); > > > -static int arm_spe_pmu_device_dt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > +static const struct platform_device_id arm_spe_match[] = { > > > + { "arm,spe-v1", 0}, > > > > It would be nice if we could avoid duplicating this string from the ACPI > > parsing code. > > Ok sure, I just need to find a good common place for it. > > > > > > + { } > > > +}; > > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, arm_spe_match); > > > + > > > +static int arm_spe_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > { > > > int ret; > > > struct arm_spe_pmu *spe_pmu; > > > @@ -1236,11 +1242,12 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_device_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > } > > > static struct platform_driver arm_spe_pmu_driver = { > > > + .id_table = arm_spe_match, > > > .driver = { > > > .name = DRVNAME, > > > .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(arm_spe_pmu_of_match), > > > > Hmm, so some other drivers don't hook .id_table like you do, but instead > > hook .acpi_match_table in the driver structure. Is that not better? > > This isn't actually an ACPI device, (aka not defined in the namespace), so > its missing much of the ACPI functionality. I think that also means its > needs to be declared this way. Looking at platform_match(), I'd really like to avoid having both an .id_table and an .of_match_table field. acpi_of_match_device() will actually use the .of_match_table, but it relies on ACPI_COMPANION returning a valid acpi_device. If we don't have one of those, perhaps we can use the .id_table exclusively and drop the .of_match_table instead? Will From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FF5C10F14 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 13:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2313322327 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 13:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729543AbfDPNvD (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:51:03 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:55474 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726215AbfDPNvD (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:51:03 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 740AEEBD; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 06:51:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fuggles.cambridge.arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F0AC3F59C; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 06:51:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:50:55 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Jeremy Linton Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, linuxarm@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf: arm_spe: Enable ACPI/Platform automatic module loading Message-ID: <20190416135055.GA3313@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20190326223938.5365-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <20190326223938.5365-5-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <20190404170423.GC28932@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> <065cc8ae-f2c0-e493-b0a6-5c7340db37f5@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <065cc8ae-f2c0-e493-b0a6-5c7340db37f5@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1+86 (6f28e57d73f2) () Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20190416135055.vRi6V4W3zPA6QNurwUzogYL_rLvNjDsXLDsS-T41EVY@z> On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 12:24:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > On 4/4/19 12:04 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 05:39:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > > Lets add the MODULE_TABLE and platform id_table entries so that > > > the SPE driver can attach to the ACPI platform device created by > > > the core pmu code. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton > > > Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla > > > --- > > > drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 11 +++++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > > > index 7cb766dafe85..ffa2c76c08bb 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > > > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > > > @@ -1176,7 +1176,13 @@ static const struct of_device_id arm_spe_pmu_of_match[] = { > > > }; > > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, arm_spe_pmu_of_match); > > > -static int arm_spe_pmu_device_dt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > +static const struct platform_device_id arm_spe_match[] = { > > > + { "arm,spe-v1", 0}, > > > > It would be nice if we could avoid duplicating this string from the ACPI > > parsing code. > > Ok sure, I just need to find a good common place for it. > > > > > > + { } > > > +}; > > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, arm_spe_match); > > > + > > > +static int arm_spe_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > { > > > int ret; > > > struct arm_spe_pmu *spe_pmu; > > > @@ -1236,11 +1242,12 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_device_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > } > > > static struct platform_driver arm_spe_pmu_driver = { > > > + .id_table = arm_spe_match, > > > .driver = { > > > .name = DRVNAME, > > > .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(arm_spe_pmu_of_match), > > > > Hmm, so some other drivers don't hook .id_table like you do, but instead > > hook .acpi_match_table in the driver structure. Is that not better? > > This isn't actually an ACPI device, (aka not defined in the namespace), so > its missing much of the ACPI functionality. I think that also means its > needs to be declared this way. Looking at platform_match(), I'd really like to avoid having both an .id_table and an .of_match_table field. acpi_of_match_device() will actually use the .of_match_table, but it relies on ACPI_COMPANION returning a valid acpi_device. If we don't have one of those, perhaps we can use the .id_table exclusively and drop the .of_match_table instead? Will