Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf: arm_spe: Enable ACPI/Platform automatic module loading | From | Jeremy Linton <> | Date | Thu, 25 Apr 2019 19:58:28 -0500 |
| |
Hi,
On 4/16/19 8:50 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 12:24:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: >> On 4/4/19 12:04 PM, Will Deacon wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 05:39:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: >>>> Lets add the MODULE_TABLE and platform id_table entries so that >>>> the SPE driver can attach to the ACPI platform device created by >>>> the core pmu code. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> >>>> Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 11 +++++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c >>>> index 7cb766dafe85..ffa2c76c08bb 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c >>>> @@ -1176,7 +1176,13 @@ static const struct of_device_id arm_spe_pmu_of_match[] = { >>>> }; >>>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, arm_spe_pmu_of_match); >>>> -static int arm_spe_pmu_device_dt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> +static const struct platform_device_id arm_spe_match[] = { >>>> + { "arm,spe-v1", 0}, >>> >>> It would be nice if we could avoid duplicating this string from the ACPI >>> parsing code. >> >> Ok sure, I just need to find a good common place for it.
There doesn't appear to be a good common place for this, so maybe arm_pmu.h, which can then be included in the spe driver is the right thing.
>> >>> >>>> + { } >>>> +}; >>>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, arm_spe_match); >>>> + >>>> +static int arm_spe_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> { >>>> int ret; >>>> struct arm_spe_pmu *spe_pmu; >>>> @@ -1236,11 +1242,12 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_device_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> } >>>> static struct platform_driver arm_spe_pmu_driver = { >>>> + .id_table = arm_spe_match, >>>> .driver = { >>>> .name = DRVNAME, >>>> .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(arm_spe_pmu_of_match), >>> >>> Hmm, so some other drivers don't hook .id_table like you do, but instead >>> hook .acpi_match_table in the driver structure. Is that not better? >> >> This isn't actually an ACPI device, (aka not defined in the namespace), so >> its missing much of the ACPI functionality. I think that also means its >> needs to be declared this way. > > Looking at platform_match(), I'd really like to avoid having both an > .id_table and an .of_match_table field.
> > acpi_of_match_device() will actually use the .of_match_table, but it relies > on ACPI_COMPANION returning a valid acpi_device. If we don't have one of
Right, via the fwnode it can cause an acpi DSDT defined device with a _DSD "compatible" property to match an entry in the of_match_table compatible string. I don't think this is us...
> those, perhaps we can use the .id_table exclusively and drop the > .of_match_table instead?
This definitely made me do my homework, the following is AFAIK:
Its possible to match on just a .id_table, but this requires matching the OF device name against the id_table name rather than against the OF compatible string (*). This doesn't seem like a good idea, despite platform_device_id entries being significantly smaller than the of_device_id ones. Plus, I think we end up with two duplicate tables because we still need the MODULE_TABLE(of,xxx) to assure that userspace can associate the modalias with the module.
OTOH, it seems possible to match on module name directly ('arm_spe_pmu'), but this limits us to only a single device type for all ACPI device variations unless we put platform checks in the module itself (ick!). I suspect in the future if a spe.v2 were to come out this would be a problem unless a separate module were created. Then there is the fact this still needs a platform_device_id table, as the modalias will read "platform:arm_spe_pmu". Which will cause people to question why its not just assigned and matched against the .id_table.
*(interestingly trivia: There doesn't appear to be a single arm64 module which matches on a MODULE_TABLE OF name. They only match type or compatible. Out of the 3534 modules on my machine only three do any OF table type matching, ipmi_si and two drivers for freescale networking fsl_pq_mdio and gianfar_driver. In those cases, i'm not even sure its actually necessary.)
| |