lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH V3 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt
Date
From
On 2013-11-18 14:18, Vinayak Kale wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> wrote:
>> Vinayak,
>>
>>
>> On 2013-11-18 13:22, Vinayak Kale wrote:
>>>
>>> Add support for irq registration when pmu interrupt is percpu.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale@apm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tuan Phan <tphan@apm.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 102
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>>> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
>>> b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
>>> index cea1594..23475f6 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
>>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>>>
>>> #include <linux/bitmap.h>
>>> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
>>> +#include <linux/irq.h>
>>> #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>> #include <linux/export.h>
>>> #include <linux/perf_event.h>
>>> @@ -363,22 +364,51 @@ validate_group(struct perf_event *event)
>>> }
>>>
>>> static void
>>> +armpmu_disable_percpu_irq(void *data)
>>> +{
>>> + struct arm_pmu *armpmu = data;
>>> + struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device;
>>> + int irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0);
>>> +
>>> + cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(),
>>> &armpmu->active_irqs);
>>> + disable_percpu_irq(irq);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void
>>> armpmu_release_hardware(struct arm_pmu *armpmu)
>>> {
>>> int i, irq, irqs;
>>> struct platform_device *pmu_device = armpmu->plat_device;
>>>
>>> - irqs = min(pmu_device->num_resources, num_possible_cpus());
>>> + irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, 0);
>>>
>>> - for (i = 0; i < irqs; ++i) {
>>> - if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(i,
>>> &armpmu->active_irqs))
>>> - continue;
>>> - irq = platform_get_irq(pmu_device, i);
>>> - if (irq >= 0)
>>> - free_irq(irq, armpmu);
>>> + if (irq_to_desc(irq) && irq_is_percpu(irq)) {
>>
>>
>> Why do you need to check the irq_desc here? It really looks like a
>> misuse of
>> the API.
> I don't think it's being misused. In case of invalid irq number, the
> API would return null.

And feeding an error code to irq_to_desc() doesn't disturb you?
Do you call that a normal use of the API? Humfff....

M.
--
Fast, cheap, reliable. Pick two.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-11-18 16:01    [W:0.064 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site