Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH V3 2/2] arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt | Date | Mon, 18 Nov 2013 14:40:32 +0000 | From | Marc Zyngier <> |
| |
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.
| |