Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1622948
| From | Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 03/11] powerpc/powernv: Detect supported IMC units and its events |
| Date | 2017-04-13 13:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tvLqa-2qX-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tsbCx-8d5-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tsbCy-8d5-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <ttb7s-66T-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <ttc3v-6L0-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Anju T Sudhakar <anju@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> On Thursday 06 April 2017 02:07 PM, Stewart Smith wrote:
>> Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-imc.c
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-imc.c
>>> @@ -33,6 +33,388 @@
>> <snip>
>>> +static void imc_pmu_setup(struct device_node *parent)
>>> +{
>>> + struct device_node *child;
>>> + int pmu_count = 0, rc = 0;
>>> + const struct property *pp;
>>> +
>>> + if (!parent)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + /* Setup all the IMC pmus */
>>> + for_each_child_of_node(parent, child) {
>>> + pp = of_get_property(child, "compatible", NULL);
>>> + if (pp) {
>>> + /*
>>> + * If there is a node with a "compatible" field,
>>> + * that's a PMU node
>>> + */
>>> + rc = imc_pmu_create(child, pmu_count);
>>> + if (rc)
>>> + return;
>>> + pmu_count++;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +}
>> This doesn't strike me as the right kind of structure, the presence of a
>> compatible property really just says "hey, there's this device and it's
>> compatible with these ways of accessing it".
>>
>> I'm guessing the idea behind having imc-nest-offset/size in a top level
>> node is because it's common to everything under it and the aim is to not
>> blow up the device tree to be enormous.
>>
>> So why not go after each ibm,imc-counters-nest compatible node under the
>> top level ibm,opal-in-memory-counters node? (i'm not convinced that
>> having ibm,ibmc-counters-nest versus ibm,imc-counters-core and
>> ibm,imc-counters-thread as I see in the dts is correct though, as
>> they're all accessed exactly the same way?)
>
> The idea here is, we have one directory which contains common events
> information for nest(same incase of core and thread), and one directory
> for each nest(/core/thread) pmu.
> So while parsing we need to make sure that the node which we are parsing
> is the pmu node, not the node which contains the common event
> information. We use the "compatible" property here for that purpose.
> Because we don't have a compatible property for the node which contains
> events info.
That's a really bad hack.
You can use the compatible property to detect the node you're looking
for, but you need to look at the *value* of the property and check it's
what you expect. Just checking that it's there is fragile.
cheers
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH v6 03/11] powerpc/powernv: Detect supported IMC units and its events Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> - 2017-04-13 13:50 +0200 Re: [PATCH v6 03/11] powerpc/powernv: Detect supported IMC units and its events Anju T Sudhakar <anju@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-04-17 10:10 +0200
csiph-web