Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCHv2 1/4] arm-cci: Refactor CCI PMU code | From | "Suzuki K. Poulose" <> | Date | Wed, 4 Nov 2015 18:17:36 +0000 |
| |
On 04/11/15 18:01, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 02:05:23PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote: >> This patch refactors the CCI PMU driver code a little bit to >> make it easier share the code for enabling/disabling the CCI >> PMU. This will be used by the hooks to work around the special cases >> where writing to a counter is not always that easy(e.g, CCI-500) >>
>> +static void cci_pmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu) >> +{ >> + struct cci_pmu *cci_pmu = to_cci_pmu(pmu); >> + struct cci_pmu_hw_events *hw_events = &cci_pmu->hw_events; >> + unsigned long flags; >> + >> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&hw_events->pmu_lock, flags); >> + __cci_pmu_disable(); >> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hw_events->pmu_lock, flags); >> +} > > Why are these moved up here? It makes the diff harder to read, and it > doesn't seem necessary in the context of this patch. > > Would they otherwise have to move in a later patch? It might be better > to move them when required (without changes).
These will be used later in cci500 specific routines to write the counter. I can move them later.
>> - if (unlikely(!pmu_is_valid_counter(cci_pmu, idx))) >> + if (unlikely(!pmu_is_valid_counter(cci_pmu, idx))) { >> dev_err(&cci_pmu->plat_device->dev, "Invalid CCI PMU counter %d\n", idx); >> - else >> - pmu_write_register(cci_pmu, value, idx, CCI_PMU_CNTR); >> + return; >> + } >> + __pmu_write_counter(cci_pmu, idx, value); >> } > > While I don't disagree with the new structure of this function, the > reorganisation wasn't necessary. We only need to substitute > __pmu_write_counter in place of pmu_write_register.
We will add a check in Patch4/4 to override the default method with a CCI_PMU model specific method.
> > I'm happy with splitting out the lower level accessors, but I think the > additional reshuffling makes this patch overly complex. I'd prefer the > minial facotring out if possible.
Ok, I will rearrange the patches to make the changes readable.
Thanks Suzuki
| |