On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 01:47:35PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:

On 26/07/17 12:19, Jan Glauber wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 04:39:18PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:

quoted

On 25/07/17 16:04, Jan Glauber wrote:

quoted

Add support for the PMU counters on Cavium SOC memory controllers.

This patch also adds generic functions to allow supporting more
devices with PMU counters.

Properties of the LMC PMU counters:
- not stoppable
- fixed purpose
- read-only
- one PCI device per memory controller

Signed-off-by: Jan Glauber <redacted>
---
drivers/perf/Kconfig       |   8 +
drivers/perf/Makefile      |   1 +
drivers/perf/cavium_pmu.c  | 424 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/cpuhotplug.h |   1 +
4 files changed, 434 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 drivers/perf/cavium_pmu.c

diff --git a/drivers/perf/Kconfig b/drivers/perf/Kconfig
index e5197ff..a46c3f0 100644
--- a/drivers/perf/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/perf/Kconfig

@@ -43,4 +43,12 @@ config XGENE_PMU
       help
         Say y if you want to use APM X-Gene SoC performance monitors.

+config CAVIUM_PMU
+	bool "Cavium SOC PMU"

Is there any specific reason why this can't be built as a module ?

Yes. I don't know how to load the module automatically. I can't make it
a pci driver as the EDAC driver "owns" the device (and having two
drivers for one device wont work as far as I know). I tried to hook
into the EDAC driver but the EDAC maintainer was not overly welcoming
that approach.

quoted

And while it would be possible to have it a s a module I think it is of
no use if it requires manualy loading. But maybe there is a simple
solution I'm missing here?

If you are talking about a Cavium specific EDAC driver, may be we could
make that depend on this driver "at runtime" via symbols (may be even,
trigger the probe of PMU), which will be referenced only when CONFIG_CAVIUM_PMU
is defined. It is not the perfect solution, but that should do the trick.

I think that is roughly what I proposed in v6. Can you have a look at:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/6/23/333
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9806427/

Probably there is a better way to do it. Or maybe we just keep it as
built-in for the time being.

--Jan