Re: [PATCH v2] drivers/perf: Add support for ARMv8.3-SPE
flat view
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: 2020-10-02 10:57:20
Also in:
lkml
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:31:35PM +0800, Wei Li wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Armv8.3 extends the SPE by adding: - Alignment field in the Events packet, and filtering on this event using PMSEVFR_EL1. - Support for the Scalable Vector Extension (SVE). The main additions for SVE are: - Recording the vector length for SVE operations in the Operation Type packet. It is not possible to filter on vector length. - Incomplete predicate and empty predicate fields in the Events packet, and filtering on these events using PMSEVFR_EL1. Update the check of pmsevfr for empty/partial predicated SVE and alignment event in SPE driver. For adaption by the version of SPE, expose 'pmsver' as cap attribute to userspace. Signed-off-by: Wei Li <redacted> --- v1 -> v2: - Rename 'pmuver' to 'pmsver', change it's type to 'u16' from 'int'. (Suggested by Will and Leo.) - Expose 'pmsver' as cap attribute through sysfs, instead of printing. (Suggested by Will.) --- arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h | 4 +++- drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h index 554a7e8ecb07..f4f9c1fc6398 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h@@ -281,7 +281,6 @@ #define SYS_PMSFCR_EL1_ST_SHIFT 18 #define SYS_PMSEVFR_EL1 sys_reg(3, 0, 9, 9, 5) -#define SYS_PMSEVFR_EL1_RES0 0x0000ffff00ff0f55UL #define SYS_PMSLATFR_EL1 sys_reg(3, 0, 9, 9, 6) #define SYS_PMSLATFR_EL1_MINLAT_SHIFT 0@@ -787,6 +786,9 @@ #define ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_5 0x6 #define ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_IMP_DEF 0xf +#define ID_AA64DFR0_PMSVER_8_2 0x1 +#define ID_AA64DFR0_PMSVER_8_3 0x2 + #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_SHIFT 24 #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_1 0x4diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c index cc00915ad6d1..52e7869f5621 100644 --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ struct arm_spe_pmu { struct hlist_node hotplug_node; int irq; /* PPI */ - + u16 pmsver; u16 min_period; u16 counter_sz;@@ -80,6 +80,15 @@ struct arm_spe_pmu { /* Keep track of our dynamic hotplug state */ static enum cpuhp_state arm_spe_pmu_online; +static u64 sys_pmsevfr_el1_mask[] = { + [ID_AA64DFR0_PMSVER_8_2] = GENMASK_ULL(63, 48) | GENMASK_ULL(31, 24) | + GENMASK_ULL(15, 12) | BIT_ULL(7) | BIT_ULL(5) | BIT_ULL(3) | + BIT_ULL(1), + [ID_AA64DFR0_PMSVER_8_3] = GENMASK_ULL(63, 48) | GENMASK_ULL(31, 24) | + GENMASK_ULL(18, 17) | GENMASK_ULL(15, 11) | BIT_ULL(7) | + BIT_ULL(5) | BIT_ULL(3) | BIT_ULL(1), +};
Ok, so I finally figured out what I don't like about this: it's the fact that the RES0 mask only ever reduces, but we have no way of ensuring that by construction with this approach. In other words, it's a bit brittle to keep all of these things defined entirely separately from one another. How about a small change so that we define things like: #define SYS_PMSEVFR_EL1_RES0_8_2 SYS_PMSEVFR_EL1_RES0 & ~(...) #define SYS_PMSEVFR_EL1_RES0_8_3 SYS_PMSEVFR_EL1_RES0_8_2 & ~(...) where the '...' parts identify the bits that are no longer RES0 for that version of the architecture? What do you think? Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel