[RFC,v1,0/2] perf/smmuv3: dts get opt and simplify code

Message

Jay Chen July 6, 2020, 11:22 a.m. UTC

This patch set firstly to simplify the code in smmu pmu probe,
and then support to get options in dts

Jay Chen (2):
  perf/smmuv3: To simplify code for ioremap page in pmcg
  perf/smmuv3: To support the dts to get options

 drivers/perf/arm_smmuv3_pmu.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Will Deacon July 13, 2020, 8:46 p.m. UTC | #1

On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 19:22:44 +0800, Jay Chen wrote:
> This patch set firstly to simplify the code in smmu pmu probe,
> and then support to get options in dts
> 
> Jay Chen (2):
>   perf/smmuv3: To simplify code for ioremap page in pmcg
>   perf/smmuv3: To support the dts to get options
> 
> [...]

Applied to will (for-next/perf), thanks!

[1/1] perf/smmuv3: To simplify code for ioremap page in pmcg
      https://git.kernel.org/will/c/f011856ce7b6

Cheers,

Rob Herring (Arm) July 13, 2020, 11:15 p.m. UTC | #2

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 09:46:58PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 19:22:44 +0800, Jay Chen wrote:
> > This patch set firstly to simplify the code in smmu pmu probe,
> > and then support to get options in dts
> > 
> > Jay Chen (2):
> >   perf/smmuv3: To simplify code for ioremap page in pmcg
> >   perf/smmuv3: To support the dts to get options
> > 
> > [...]
> 
> Applied to will (for-next/perf), thanks!

Without a binding document for the undocumented property and 
compatible string!?

Is the 'arm-smmu-v3-pmcg' actually a separate block from the SMMU? Or is 
this just an add a compatible to instantiate a driver?

Rob

Will Deacon July 14, 2020, 7:48 a.m. UTC | #3

Hi Rob,

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 05:15:55PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 09:46:58PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 19:22:44 +0800, Jay Chen wrote:
> > > This patch set firstly to simplify the code in smmu pmu probe,
> > > and then support to get options in dts
> > > 
> > > Jay Chen (2):
> > >   perf/smmuv3: To simplify code for ioremap page in pmcg
> > >   perf/smmuv3: To support the dts to get options
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > 
> > Applied to will (for-next/perf), thanks!
> 
> Without a binding document for the undocumented property and 
> compatible string!?

No, I only took the second patch ("To simplify code...")! It would be nice
if b4 was a big clearer about that when cherry-picking, but I'm not sure
exactly what it could do. Maybe if it only replied to the patch being
picked, rather than the cover letter?

I'm usually pretty careful about avoiding DT changes without your ack.

> Is the 'arm-smmu-v3-pmcg' actually a separate block from the SMMU? Or is 
> this just an add a compatible to instantiate a driver?

Not quite sure how to answer that one... afaik, the PMCG is a bunch of
distributed counter blocks that may or may not be present and are driven
entirely independently of the rest of the SMMU, which is a lot more
standardised. In fact, I'm not sure why ARM_SMMU_V3_PMU depends on
ARM_SMMU_V3, it builds perfectly fine without that (and with the main
driver disabled).

Will

Will Deacon July 14, 2020, 7:49 a.m. UTC | #4

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 08:48:01AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 05:15:55PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 09:46:58PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 19:22:44 +0800, Jay Chen wrote:
> > > > This patch set firstly to simplify the code in smmu pmu probe,
> > > > and then support to get options in dts
> > > > 
> > > > Jay Chen (2):
> > > >   perf/smmuv3: To simplify code for ioremap page in pmcg
> > > >   perf/smmuv3: To support the dts to get options
> > > > 
> > > > [...]
> > > 
> > > Applied to will (for-next/perf), thanks!
> > 
> > Without a binding document for the undocumented property and 
> > compatible string!?
> 
> No, I only took the second patch ("To simplify code...")!

Duh, *first patch*.

Will

Rob Herring (Arm) July 14, 2020, 10:26 p.m. UTC | #5

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 1:48 AM Will Deacon <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 05:15:55PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 09:46:58PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 19:22:44 +0800, Jay Chen wrote:
> > > > This patch set firstly to simplify the code in smmu pmu probe,
> > > > and then support to get options in dts
> > > >
> > > > Jay Chen (2):
> > > >   perf/smmuv3: To simplify code for ioremap page in pmcg
> > > >   perf/smmuv3: To support the dts to get options
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > >
> > > Applied to will (for-next/perf), thanks!
> >
> > Without a binding document for the undocumented property and
> > compatible string!?
>
> No, I only took the second patch ("To simplify code...")! It would be nice
> if b4 was a big clearer about that when cherry-picking, but I'm not sure
> exactly what it could do. Maybe if it only replied to the patch being
> picked, rather than the cover letter?

Humm, I thought the default b4 reply did list exactly which patches
were applied. See broonie's replies for example which are using it I
think. Maybe you lose that if not using the default template.

>
> I'm usually pretty careful about avoiding DT changes without your ack.
>
> > Is the 'arm-smmu-v3-pmcg' actually a separate block from the SMMU? Or is
> > this just an add a compatible to instantiate a driver?
>
> Not quite sure how to answer that one... afaik, the PMCG is a bunch of
> distributed counter blocks that may or may not be present and are driven
> entirely independently of the rest of the SMMU, which is a lot more
> standardised. In fact, I'm not sure why ARM_SMMU_V3_PMU depends on
> ARM_SMMU_V3, it builds perfectly fine without that (and with the main
> driver disabled).

Okay, seems that a separate node or nodes is warranted.

Rob