| Message ID | 1573622695-25607-1-git-send-email-hao.wu@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | add performance reporting support to FPGA DFL drivers | expand |
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 01:24:53PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > Hi Moritz and all, Hi Will and Mark, Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. Hi Moritz, Could you please help us on review the other parts? This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) Hao > > This patchset adds performance reporting support for FPGA DFL drivers. It > introduces one pmu to expose userspace interfaces via standard perf API. > User could use standard perf tool to access perf events exposed via pmu. > > This patchset is generated based on fpga/for-next branch. > > Main changes from v5: > - use dev_ext_attribute instead of fme_perf_event_attr. > - use is_visible function to decide which events to expose per > hardware capability, and add event_init checking for all events. > > Main changes from v4: > - rebase and clean up. > - update Kconfig for PERF_EVENTS dependency. > > Main changes from v3: > - add more descriptions in doc, including how to use perf tool for these > hardware counters. (patch #1) > - use standard perf API instead of sysfs entries. (patch #2) > > Wu Hao (1): > fpga: dfl: fme: add performance reporting support > > Xu Yilun (1): > Documentation: fpga: dfl: add description for performance reporting > support > > Documentation/fpga/dfl.rst | 83 ++++ > drivers/fpga/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/fpga/dfl-fme-main.c | 4 + > drivers/fpga/dfl-fme-perf.c | 943 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/fpga/dfl-fme.h | 2 + > drivers/fpga/dfl.h | 2 + > 6 files changed, 1035 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 drivers/fpga/dfl-fme-perf.c > > -- > 1.8.3.1
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > Hi Will and Mark, > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? Will
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:01:28AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > Hi Will and Mark, > > > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. > > Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? Hi Will Thanks for the quick response. This is one sub feature for DFL based FPGAs, and we plan to put this sub feature together with others, including related documentation. It only registers a standard perf pmu for its userspace interfaces. > > > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) > > Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? We switched to perf API from v4, and started ccing you and Mark from v5. :) Thanks Hao > > Will
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:08:39PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:01:28AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > Hi Will and Mark, > > > > > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > > > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. > > > > Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? > > Hi Will > > Thanks for the quick response. This is one sub feature for DFL based FPGAs, > and we plan to put this sub feature together with others, including related > documentation. It only registers a standard perf pmu for its userspace > interfaces. > > > > > > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > > > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) > > > > Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? > > We switched to perf API from v4, and started ccing you and Mark from v5. :) Hi Will Did you get a chance to look into this patchset? Thanks Hao > > Thanks > Hao > > > > > Will
On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 10:45:27AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:08:39PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:01:28AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > Hi Will and Mark, > > > > > > > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > > > > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. > > > > > > Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? > > > > Hi Will > > > > Thanks for the quick response. This is one sub feature for DFL based FPGAs, > > and we plan to put this sub feature together with others, including related > > documentation. It only registers a standard perf pmu for its userspace > > interfaces. > > > > > > > > > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > > > > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) > > > > > > Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? > > > > We switched to perf API from v4, and started ccing you and Mark from v5. :) > > Hi Will > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset? > > Thanks > Hao Hi Will Did you have time to look into this patchset? We have done review work for FPGA part. And as a perf driver, we appreciate your comments. Thanks Yilun > > > > > Thanks > > Hao > > > > > > > > Will
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 09:01:04AM +0800, Xu Yilum wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 10:45:27AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:08:39PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:01:28AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > Hi Will and Mark, > > > > > > > > > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > > > > > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. > > > > > > > > Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > Thanks for the quick response. This is one sub feature for DFL based FPGAs, > > > and we plan to put this sub feature together with others, including related > > > documentation. It only registers a standard perf pmu for its userspace > > > interfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > > > > > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? > > > > > > We switched to perf API from v4, and started ccing you and Mark from v5. :) > > > > Hi Will > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset? > > > > Thanks > > Hao > > Hi Will > > Did you have time to look into this patchset? We have done review work > for FPGA part. And as a perf driver, we appreciate your comments. > > Thanks > Yilun Hi Will Did you get a chance to look into this patchset these days? Actually we didn't receive any comments for a long time, if you are busy and don't have enough time on this, do you know if someone else could help with review and ack from perf driver point of view, or any other things we can do to speed up this? Thanks in advance! Hao > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > Hao > > > > > > > > > > > Will
On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 10:37:42AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 09:01:04AM +0800, Xu Yilum wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 10:45:27AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:08:39PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:01:28AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > > Hi Will and Mark, > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > > > > > > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. > > > > > > > > > > Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > Thanks for the quick response. This is one sub feature for DFL based FPGAs, > > > > and we plan to put this sub feature together with others, including related > > > > documentation. It only registers a standard perf pmu for its userspace > > > > interfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > > > > > > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? > > > > > > > > We switched to perf API from v4, and started ccing you and Mark from v5. :) > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Hao > > > > Hi Will > > > > Did you have time to look into this patchset? We have done review work > > for FPGA part. And as a perf driver, we appreciate your comments. > > > > Thanks > > Yilun > > Hi Will > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset these days? > > Actually we didn't receive any comments for a long time, if you are busy and > don't have enough time on this, do you know if someone else could help with > review and ack from perf driver point of view, or any other things we can do > to speed up this? Thanks in advance! Hi Moritz Looks like still no response from Will. :( Do you know someone else could help? Thanks Hao > > Hao > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Hao > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Will
Hi Greg, On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 01:56:05PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 10:37:42AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 09:01:04AM +0800, Xu Yilum wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 10:45:27AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:08:39PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:01:28AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Will and Mark, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > > > > > > > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? > > > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the quick response. This is one sub feature for DFL based FPGAs, > > > > > and we plan to put this sub feature together with others, including related > > > > > documentation. It only registers a standard perf pmu for its userspace > > > > > interfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > > > > > > > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? > > > > > > > > > > We switched to perf API from v4, and started ccing you and Mark from v5. :) > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Hao > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > Did you have time to look into this patchset? We have done review work > > > for FPGA part. And as a perf driver, we appreciate your comments. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Yilun > > > > Hi Will > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset these days? > > > > Actually we didn't receive any comments for a long time, if you are busy and > > don't have enough time on this, do you know if someone else could help with > > review and ack from perf driver point of view, or any other things we can do > > to speed up this? Thanks in advance! > > Hi Moritz > > Looks like still no response from Will. :( > > Do you know someone else could help? Do you have some feedback? I'm a bit confused on what to do in such a situation, do I just take the patch if the maintainer doesn't respond for a while? As always thanks for your help! Cheers, Moritz
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 09:10:40PM -0800, Moritz Fischer wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 01:56:05PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 10:37:42AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 09:01:04AM +0800, Xu Yilum wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 10:45:27AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:08:39PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:01:28AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Will and Mark, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > > > > > > > > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the quick response. This is one sub feature for DFL based FPGAs, > > > > > > and we plan to put this sub feature together with others, including related > > > > > > documentation. It only registers a standard perf pmu for its userspace > > > > > > interfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > > > > > > > > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? > > > > > > > > > > > > We switched to perf API from v4, and started ccing you and Mark from v5. :) > > > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Hao > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > Did you have time to look into this patchset? We have done review work > > > > for FPGA part. And as a perf driver, we appreciate your comments. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Yilun > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset these days? > > > > > > Actually we didn't receive any comments for a long time, if you are busy and > > > don't have enough time on this, do you know if someone else could help with > > > review and ack from perf driver point of view, or any other things we can do > > > to speed up this? Thanks in advance! > > > > Hi Moritz > > > > Looks like still no response from Will. :( > > > > Do you know someone else could help? > > Do you have some feedback? I'm a bit confused on what to do in such a > situation, do I just take the patch if the maintainer doesn't respond > for a while? Resend it and say something like "please review" or the like. With the holidays and catching up from the holidays, this time of year is usually very backlogged for lots of reviewers. greg k-h
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 09:14:00AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 09:10:40PM -0800, Moritz Fischer wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 01:56:05PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 10:37:42AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 09:01:04AM +0800, Xu Yilum wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 10:45:27AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 04:08:39PM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:01:28AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:34:12AM +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Will and Mark, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you please help us on review this patchset? as this patchset mainly > > > > > > > > > introduced a new perf driver following the similar way as drivers/perf/*. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why is it not under drivers/perf/, then? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the quick response. This is one sub feature for DFL based FPGAs, > > > > > > > and we plan to put this sub feature together with others, including related > > > > > > > documentation. It only registers a standard perf pmu for its userspace > > > > > > > interfaces. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patchset has been submitted for a long time but didn't receive any > > > > > > > > > comment after v4. we appreciate any review comments! thanks in advance. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure I saw the previous versions. Guessing I wasn't on cc? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We switched to perf API from v4, and started ccing you and Mark from v5. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Hao > > > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > > > Did you have time to look into this patchset? We have done review work > > > > > for FPGA part. And as a perf driver, we appreciate your comments. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Yilun > > > > > > > > Hi Will > > > > > > > > Did you get a chance to look into this patchset these days? > > > > > > > > Actually we didn't receive any comments for a long time, if you are busy and > > > > don't have enough time on this, do you know if someone else could help with > > > > review and ack from perf driver point of view, or any other things we can do > > > > to speed up this? Thanks in advance! > > > > > > Hi Moritz > > > > > > Looks like still no response from Will. :( > > > > > > Do you know someone else could help? > > > > Do you have some feedback? I'm a bit confused on what to do in such a > > situation, do I just take the patch if the maintainer doesn't respond > > for a while? > > Resend it and say something like "please review" or the like. With the > holidays and catching up from the holidays, this time of year is usually > very backlogged for lots of reviewers. Sure, will resend this patchset soon. Thanks! Hao > > greg k-h
Hi Moritz and all, This patchset adds performance reporting support for FPGA DFL drivers. It introduces one pmu to expose userspace interfaces via standard perf API. User could use standard perf tool to access perf events exposed via pmu. This patchset is generated based on fpga/for-next branch. Main changes from v5: - use dev_ext_attribute instead of fme_perf_event_attr. - use is_visible function to decide which events to expose per hardware capability, and add event_init checking for all events. Main changes from v4: - rebase and clean up. - update Kconfig for PERF_EVENTS dependency. Main changes from v3: - add more descriptions in doc, including how to use perf tool for these hardware counters. (patch #1) - use standard perf API instead of sysfs entries. (patch #2) Wu Hao (1): fpga: dfl: fme: add performance reporting support Xu Yilun (1): Documentation: fpga: dfl: add description for performance reporting support Documentation/fpga/dfl.rst | 83 ++++ drivers/fpga/Makefile | 1 + drivers/fpga/dfl-fme-main.c | 4 + drivers/fpga/dfl-fme-perf.c | 943 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/fpga/dfl-fme.h | 2 + drivers/fpga/dfl.h | 2 + 6 files changed, 1035 insertions(+) create mode 100644 drivers/fpga/dfl-fme-perf.c