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=-7.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 35860C2BC73 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 07:45:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793A6215F2 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 07:28:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727201AbfLDH23 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Dec 2019 02:28:29 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42342 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725958AbfLDH23 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Dec 2019 02:28:29 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 349DBACA5; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 07:28:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: perf record doesn't work on rtd129x SoC To: Wang YanQing References: <20191204045559.GA10458@udknight> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-realtek-soc@lists.infradead.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Mark Rutland , Will Deacon From: =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=c3=a4rber?= Organization: SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2019 08:28:26 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191204045559.GA10458@udknight> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi YanQing, + LAKML + Mark + Will Am 04.12.19 um 05:55 schrieb Wang YanQing: > I use "perf record" to debug performance issue on RTD1296 SOC, it does't work, but > the "perf stat" is ok! Thanks for the report - which board, branch and (base) tag are you testing against? And are you building perf yourself from kernel sources, or are you using some distro package? I only have Busybox in my initrd on DS418; I have not tested perf. > After some dig in the kernel, I find the reason is no pmu overflow interrupt, I think > below pmu configuration isn't right for RTD1296: > " > arm_pmu: arm-pmu { > compatible = "arm,cortex-a53-pmu"; > interrupts = ; > }; > " > > We need 4 PMU SPI for RTD1296 (4 cores), and I guess the 48 isn't right too. Note that above rtd129x.dtsi snippet is not complete. See rtd1296.dtsi: &arm_pmu { interrupt-affinity = <&cpu0>, <&cpu1>, <&cpu2>, <&cpu3>; }; 48 and high/4 match what I see in the latest BSP: https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M4-bsp/blob/master/linux-rtk/arch/arm64/boot/dts/realtek/rtd129x/rtd-1296.dtsi#L116 > Any suggestion is welcome. > > Thanks! The only difference I see is "arm,cortex-a53-pmu" vs. "arm,armv8-pmuv3". By my reading of arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c the only difference between the two should be the name and an extra cache_map. You could try the other compatible string in your .dts, but I doubt it'll help. Hopefully the Realtek or Arm guys can shed some light. Regards, Andreas -- SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg)