On 10/11/16 15:12, Wei Huang wrote:
>
>
> On 11/10/2016 03:10 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Hi Wei,
>>
>> On 09/11/16 19:57, Wei Huang wrote:
>>> This patch moves ARMv8-related perf event definitions from perf_event.c
>>> to asm/perf_event.h; so KVM code can use them directly. This also help
>>> remove a duplicated definition of SW_INCR in perf_event.h.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Huang <w...@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/include/asm/perf_event.h | 161
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 161
>>> ------------------------------------
>>> 2 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/perf_event.h
>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/perf_event.h
>>> index 2065f46..6c7b18b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/perf_event.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/perf_event.h
>>> @@ -46,7 +46,166 @@
>>> #define ARMV8_PMU_EVTYPE_MASK 0xc800ffff /* Mask for writable
>>> bits */
>>> #define ARMV8_PMU_EVTYPE_EVENT 0xffff /* Mask for EVENT bits
>>> */
>>>
>>> -#define ARMV8_PMU_EVTYPE_EVENT_SW_INCR 0 /* Software increment
>>> event */
>>> +/*
>>> + * ARMv8 PMUv3 Performance Events handling code.
>>> + * Common event types.
>>> + */
>>> +
>>> +/* Required events. */
>>> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_SW_INCR 0x00
>>> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_L1D_CACHE_REFILL 0x03
>>> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_L1D_CACHE 0x04
>>> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_BR_MIS_PRED 0x10
>>> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_CPU_CYCLES 0x11
>>> +#define ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_BR_PRED 0x12
>>
>> In my initial review, I asked for the "required" events to be moved to a
>> shared location. What's the rational for moving absolutely everything?
>
> I did notice the phrase "required" in the original email. However I
> think it is weird to have two places for a same set of PMU definitions.
> Other developers might think these two are missing if they don't search
> kernel files carefully.
>
> If Will Deacon and you insist, I can move only two defs to perf_event.h,
> consolidated with the 2nd patch into a single one.
My personal feeling is that only architected events should be in a
public header. The CPU-specific ones are probably better kept private,
as it is doubtful that other users would appear).
I'll leave it up to Will to decide, as all I want to avoid is the
duplication of constants between the PMU and KVM code bases.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
