From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934302AbcKJPa1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 10:30:27 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:51308 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933905AbcKJPa0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 10:30:26 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 15:29:47 +0000 From: Mark Rutland To: Wei Huang Cc: Marc Zyngier , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, shannon.zhao@linaro.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, christoffer.dall@linaro.org, drjones@redhat.com, cov@codeaurora.org, will.deacon@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: perf: Move ARMv8 PMU perf event definitions to asm/perf_event.h Message-ID: <20161110152946.GG4418@leverpostej> References: <1478721480-24852-1-git-send-email-wei@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 09:12:35AM -0600, Wei Huang wrote: > On 11/10/2016 03:10 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > On 09/11/16 19:57, Wei Huang wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/perf_event.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/perf_event.h > >> +/* > >> + * ARMv8 PMUv3 Performance Events handling code. > >> + * Common event types. > >> + */ > >> + > >> +/* Required events. */ > >> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_SW_INCR 0x00 > >> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_L1D_CACHE_REFILL 0x03 > >> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_L1D_CACHE 0x04 > >> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_BR_MIS_PRED 0x10 > >> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_CPU_CYCLES 0x11 > >> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_BR_PRED 0x12 > > > > In my initial review, I asked for the "required" events to be moved to a > > shared location. What's the rational for moving absolutely everything? > > I did notice the phrase "required" in the original email. However I > think it is weird to have two places for a same set of PMU definitions. > Other developers might think these two are missing if they don't search > kernel files carefully. > > If Will Deacon and you insist, I can move only two defs to perf_event.h, > consolidated with the 2nd patch into a single one. FWIW, my personal preference would be for all the definitions (or at least all of the ARMV8_PMUV3_* ones) to be in one place. That said, I don't feel particularly strongly either way, and I'll defer to Will. Thanks, Mark.