From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
To: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
acme@kernel.org, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org,
coresight@lists.linaro.org, al.grant@arm.com,
anshuman.khandual@arm.com, mike.leach@linaro.org,
John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] perf cs-etm: Create ETE decoder
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 18:59:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210805105926.GA22454@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <654cf3ae-325b-49c9-a9d0-ebf704a83d6f@arm.com>
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 02:09:38PM +0100, James Clark wrote:
[...]
> >> -static enum _ocsd_arch_version cs_etm_decoder__get_arch_ver(u32 reg_idr1)
> >> +static enum _ocsd_arch_version cs_etm_decoder__get_arch_ver(u32 reg_idr1, u32 reg_devarch)
> >> {
> >> + /* ETE has to be v9 so set arch version to v8.3+ (ARCH__AA64) */
> >> + if (cs_etm__is_ete(reg_devarch))
> >> + return ARCH_AA64;
> >> +
> >
> > Based on values used in below change, I think we can unify the ETM
> > versio number like:
> >
> > ARCH_V8R3 : REVISION, bits[19:16] is 0x3
> > ARCH_V8R4 : REVISION, bits[19:16] is 0x4
> > ARCH_V8R5 : REVISION, bits[19:16] is 0x5
>
> Do you mean make this change in OpenCSD? At the moment it understands these
> values so I'm not sure if the extra ones would be useful:
Yes. As Mike said, these new macros will cause big changes in OpenCSD,
so I don't have strong opinion to add more macros for tracer versions.
> >> +struct cs_ete_trace_params {
> >> + struct cs_etmv4_trace_params base_params;
> >> + u32 reg_devarch;
> >
> > As we have said, can we directly support ETMv4.5, so that it can
> > smoothly support ETE features? If so, we don't need to add a new
> > structure "cs_ete_trace_params" at here.
> >
>
> I think with the new magic number change this is more likely to stay,
> what are your thoughts?
Agreed. Just wander if need to define the struct cs_ete_trace_params
as below?
struct cs_ete_trace_params {
u32 reg_idr0;
u32 reg_idr1;
u32 reg_idr2;
u32 reg_idr8;
u32 reg_configr;
u32 reg_traceidr;
u32 reg_devarch;
}
> >> +
> >> +#define TRCDEVARCH_ARCHPART_SHIFT 0
> >> +#define TRCDEVARCH_ARCHPART_MASK GENMASK(11, 0)
> >> +#define TRCDEVARCH_ARCHPART(x) (((x) & TRCDEVARCH_ARCHPART_MASK) >> TRCDEVARCH_ARCHPART_SHIFT)
> >> +
> >> +#define TRCDEVARCH_ARCHVER_SHIFT 12
> >> +#define TRCDEVARCH_ARCHVER_MASK GENMASK(15, 12)
> >> +#define TRCDEVARCH_ARCHVER(x) (((x) & TRCDEVARCH_ARCHVER_MASK) >> TRCDEVARCH_ARCHVER_SHIFT)
> >> +
> >> +bool cs_etm__is_ete(u32 trcdevarch)
> >> +{
> >> + /*
> >> + * ETE if ARCHVER is 5 (ARCHVER is 4 for ETM) and ARCHPART is 0xA13.
> >> + * See ETM_DEVARCH_ETE_ARCH in coresight-etm4x.h
> >> + */
> >> + return TRCDEVARCH_ARCHVER(trcdevarch) == 5 && TRCDEVARCH_ARCHPART(trcdevarch) == 0xA13;
> >
> > I think this is incorrect.
> >
> > Here should check the bit field "REVISION, bits[19:16]". If it's
> > field value is >= 5, then we can say it supports ETE. I checked the
> > spec for ETMv4.4 and ETMv4.6, both use the same values for the
> > Bits[15:12] = 0x4, so the architecture ID is same for ETMv4.x IPs.
> >
>
> I tried to copy this as closely as possible from the ETE driver. See in coresight-etm4x.h
>
> #define ETM_DEVARCH_ETE_ARCH \
> (ETM_DEVARCH_ARCHITECT_ARM | ETM_DEVARCH_ARCHID_ETE | ETM_DEVARCH_PRESENT)
>
> Where ETM_DEVARCH_ARCHID_ETE is ARCHVER == 5 and ARCHPART == 0xA13. I didn't check
> ETM_DEVARCH_ARCHITECT_ARM because I thought that wouldn't be necessary. If we want to make
> the change do detect >= 5 then I think this should be made in the driver first. @Suzuki,
> what do you think?
The tracer has two fields:
- ARCHID bits[15:12]
- REVISION, bits[19:16]
For ETE its ARCHID[15:12] is 0x5 and ETMv4.x's ARCHID[15:12] is 0x4.
So checking ARCHID[15:12] is the right way to distinguish if the
tracer is ETE and creates corresponding decoder for it.
When reviewed this patch I assumed we also need to create ETE decoder
if ETMv4.x has supported packet extension. As Mike confirmed, all
ETMv4.x tracers keep to use existed way to create decoder; so it's not
necessary to check REVISION bit field.
So please ignore my this comment.
Thanks,
Leo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-05 10:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-21 9:06 [PATCH 0/6] Support ETE decoding James Clark
2021-07-21 9:07 ` [PATCH 1/6] perf cs-etm: Refactor initialisation of decoder params James Clark
2021-07-31 5:48 ` Leo Yan
2021-07-21 9:07 ` [PATCH 2/6] perf cs-etm: Initialise architecture based on TRCIDR1 James Clark
2021-07-22 11:10 ` Mike Leach
2021-07-31 6:03 ` Leo Yan
2021-08-02 14:04 ` Mike Leach
2021-08-02 15:03 ` Leo Yan
2021-08-02 15:43 ` Mike Leach
2021-07-21 9:07 ` [PATCH 3/6] perf cs-etm: Save TRCDEVARCH register James Clark
2021-07-21 9:48 ` Mike Leach
2021-07-23 12:09 ` James Clark
2021-07-31 6:37 ` Leo Yan
2021-08-03 12:33 ` James Clark
2021-08-03 12:34 ` James Clark
2021-08-05 9:40 ` Leo Yan
2021-08-03 12:36 ` James Clark
2021-07-31 7:43 ` Leo Yan
2021-08-02 11:21 ` Mike Leach
2021-08-02 12:05 ` Leo Yan
2021-08-02 12:48 ` Mike Leach
2021-08-03 12:29 ` James Clark
2021-07-21 9:07 ` [PATCH 4/6] perf cs-etm: Update OpenCSD decoder for ETE James Clark
2021-07-31 6:50 ` Leo Yan
2021-07-21 9:07 ` [PATCH 5/6] perf cs-etm: Create ETE decoder James Clark
2021-07-31 7:23 ` Leo Yan
2021-08-03 13:09 ` James Clark
2021-08-05 10:59 ` Leo Yan [this message]
2021-07-21 9:07 ` [PATCH 6/6] perf cs-etm: Print the decoder name James Clark
2021-07-31 7:30 ` Leo Yan
2021-08-06 9:43 ` James Clark
2021-08-06 11:52 ` Leo Yan
2021-07-21 14:59 ` [PATCH 0/6] Support ETE decoding Mathieu Poirier
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=20210805105926.GA22454@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s \
--to=leo.yan@linaro.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=al.grant@arm.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=coresight@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=james.clark@arm.com \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=mike.leach@linaro.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--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 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).