linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
Cc: will@kernel.org, maz@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] arm64: add support for the AMU extension v1
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 18:20:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191010172058.GD40923@arrakis.emea.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190917134228.5369-2-ionela.voinescu@arm.com>

Hi Ionela,

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 02:42:25PM +0100, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_AMU_EXTN
> +
> +/*
> + * This per cpu variable only signals that the CPU implementation supports the
> + * AMU but does not provide information regarding all the events that it
> + * supports.
> + * When this amu_feat per CPU variable is true, the user of this feature can
> + * only rely on the presence of the 4 fixed counters. But this does not
> + * guarantee that the counters are enabled or access to these counters is
> + * provided by code executed at higher exception levels.
> + */
> +DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, amu_feat) = false;
> +
> +static void cpu_amu_enable(struct arm64_cpu_capabilities const *cap)
> +{
> +	if (has_cpuid_feature(cap, SCOPE_LOCAL_CPU)) {
> +		pr_info("detected CPU%d: Activity Monitors extension\n",
> +			smp_processor_id());
> +		this_cpu_write(amu_feat, true);
> +	}
> +}

Sorry if I missed anything as I just skimmed through this series. I
can't see the amu_feat used anywhere in these patches, so on its own it
doesn't make much sense.

I also can't see the advantage of allowing mismatched CPU
implementations for this feature. What's the intended use-case?

Thanks.

-- 
Catalin

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-10 17:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-17 13:42 [PATCH 0/4] arm64: ARMv8.4 Activity Monitors support Ionela Voinescu
2019-09-17 13:42 ` [PATCH 1/4] arm64: add support for the AMU extension v1 Ionela Voinescu
2019-10-10 17:20   ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2019-10-11 10:31     ` Ionela Voinescu
2019-10-11 14:31       ` Catalin Marinas
2019-09-17 13:42 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: trap to EL1 accesses to AMU counters from EL0 Ionela Voinescu
2019-09-17 13:42 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64/kvm: disable access to AMU registers from kvm guests Ionela Voinescu
2019-09-17 13:42 ` [PATCH 4/4] Documentation: arm64: document support for the AMU extension Ionela Voinescu

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=20191010172058.GD40923@arrakis.emea.arm.com \
    --to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=maz@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).