Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:35:27 +0000 | From | Cristian Marussi <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Add perf_notify_support interface |
| |
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 11:28:54AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 05:33:42PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 03:50:20PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 04:11:13PM +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote: > > > > Add a new perf_notify_support interface to the existing perf_ops to export > > > > info regarding limit/level change notification support. > > > > > > > > > > Hi Sibi, > > > > > > as I mentioned previously, in order not to add a needless stream of SCMI > > > Perf accessors I posted this: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20240129151002.1215333-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com/T/#u > > > > > > to expose all the Perf domains infos via the usual info_get(), similarly > > > to how other SCMI protocols do already. > > > > > > I think that reworking this series on that, you can certainly drop this patch and just > > > check the _notify booleans on the retrieved domain info. > > > > Sorry, but hold on with this change, I will probably post an updated version > > my patch above. > > > > As discussed in private, I would prefer to avoid exposing all the internals > to the users of SCMI perf. At the same time may we can do better if we can > check the availability of notification as part of notification enablement > from the SCMI driver, I need to think the details yet.
Yes a patch is under-work to avoid exposing too much Perf info AND to avoid adding ad-hoc accessors like xlate, in this case.
Thanks, Cristian
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |