[PATCH v4 4/5] drivers/perf: Add support for ARMv8.2 Statistical Profiling Extension
From: Will Deacon <hidden>
Date: 2017-06-05 16:11:32
Also in:
lkml
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 10:55:16AM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 16:22:56 +0100 Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
+/* Perf callbacks */ +static int arm_spe_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event *event) +{ + u64 reg; + struct perf_event_attr *attr = &event->attr; + struct arm_spe_pmu *spe_pmu = to_spe_pmu(event->pmu); + + /* This is, of course, deeply driver-specific */ + if (attr->type != event->pmu->type) + return -ENOENT; + + if (event->cpu >= 0 && + !cpumask_test_cpu(event->cpu, &spe_pmu->supported_cpus)) + return -ENOENT; + + if (arm_spe_event_to_pmsevfr(event) & PMSEVFR_EL1_RES0) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + if (event->hw.sample_period < spe_pmu->min_period || + event->hw.sample_period & PMSIRR_EL1_IVAL_MASK) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + if (attr->exclude_idle) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + /* + * Feedback-directed frequency throttling doesn't work when we + * have a buffer of samples. We'd need to manually count the + * samples in the buffer when it fills up and adjust the event + * count to reflect that. Instead, force the user to specify a + * sample period instead. + */ + if (attr->freq) + return -EINVAL; + + reg = arm_spe_event_to_pmsfcr(event); + if ((reg & BIT(PMSFCR_EL1_FE_SHIFT)) && + !(spe_pmu->features & SPE_PMU_FEAT_FILT_EVT)) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + if ((reg & BIT(PMSFCR_EL1_FT_SHIFT)) && + !(spe_pmu->features & SPE_PMU_FEAT_FILT_TYP)) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + if ((reg & BIT(PMSFCR_EL1_FL_SHIFT)) && + !(spe_pmu->features & SPE_PMU_FEAT_FILT_LAT)) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + return 0; +}AFAICT, my comments from the last submission have still not been fully addressed: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-May/508027.html
To be frank, I really don't plan to address them and, even if I did, I would trust Mark to NAK the change. If you're desperate for pr_debug, I'll add it to keep you happy, but anything more than that needs to come in the form of a separate patch submission addressing the wider problem of error reporting from PMU drivers back to userspace. Patches welcome, but I suspect you're still busy working on the tools code. Do you have any constructive comments on the patch? Will