lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 01/11] perf: add PMU_RANGE_ATTR() helper for use by sw-like pmus
On 02/25/2014 12:33 PM, Cody P Schafer wrote:
> On 02/24/2014 07:33 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> On Fri, 2014-14-02 at 22:02:05 UTC, Cody P Schafer wrote:
>>> Add PMU_RANGE_ATTR() and PMU_RANGE_RESV() (for reserved areas) which
>>> generate functions to extract the relevent bits from
>>> event->attr.config{,1,2} for use by sw-like pmus where the
>>> 'config{,1,2}' values don't map directly to hardware registers.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Cody P Schafer <cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/perf_event.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> index e56b07f..2702e91 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> @@ -871,4 +871,21 @@ _name##_show(struct device
>>> *dev, \
>>> \
>>> static struct device_attribute format_attr_##_name = __ATTR_RO(_name)
>>>
>>> +#define PMU_RANGE_ATTR(name, attr_var, bit_start, bit_end) \
>>> +PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(name, #attr_var ":" #bit_start "-" #bit_end); \
>>> +PMU_RANGE_RESV(name, attr_var, bit_start, bit_end)
>>> +
>>> +#define PMU_RANGE_RESV(name, attr_var, bit_start, bit_end) \
>>> +static u64 event_get_##name##_max(void) \
>>> +{ \
>>> + int bits = (bit_end) - (bit_start) + 1; \
>>> + return ((0x1ULL << (bits - 1ULL)) - 1ULL) | \
>>> + (0xFULL << (bits - 4ULL)); \
>>> +} \
>>> +static u64 event_get_##name(struct perf_event *event) \
>>> +{ \
>>> + return (event->attr.attr_var >> (bit_start)) & \
>>> + event_get_##name##_max(); \
>>> +}
>>
>> I still don't like the names.
>>
>> EVENT_GETTER_AND_FORMAT()
>
> EVENT_RANGE()
>
> I'd prefer to describe the intended usage rather than what is generated
> both in case we change some of the specifics later, and to provide
> additional information to the developers beyond what a simple code
> reading gives.
>
>> EVENT_RESERVED()
>
> Sure. The PMU_* naming was just based on the PMU_FORMAT_ATTR() naming,
> so I kept it for continuity with the existing API. Maybe
> EVENT_RANGE_RESERVED() would be more appropriate?
>

Thinking about this a bit more, EVENT_RANGE() and EVENT_RANGE_RESERVED()
aren't quite ideal either. The "EVENT" name collides with the files we
put in the event/ dir, which these macros generate files for the format/
dir. Maybe:

FORMAT_RANGE() and FORMAT_RANGE_RESERVED()
or
PMU_FORMAT_RANGE(), PMU_FORMAT_RANGE_RESERVED()



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-26 00:01    [W:0.056 / U:0.928 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site