[PATCH v5 11/21] RISC-V: perf: Restructure the SBI PMU code

[Atish Patra]

On 4/4/25 6:49 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 12:35:52PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
>> With Ssccfg/Smcdeleg, we no longer need SBI PMU extension to program/
>> access hpmcounter/events. However, we do need it for firmware counters.
>> Rename the driver and its related code to represent generic name
>> that will handle both sbi and ISA mechanism for hpmcounter related
>> operations. Take this opportunity to update the Kconfig names to
>> match the new driver name closely.
>>
>> No functional change intended.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Clément Léger <cleger at rivosinc.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atishp at rivosinc.com>
>> ---
>>   MAINTAINERS                                       |   4 +-
>>   arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_pmu.h             |   4 +-
>>   arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h             |   2 +-
>>   arch/riscv/kvm/Makefile                           |   4 +-
>>   arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c                         |   2 +-
>>   drivers/perf/Kconfig                              |  16 +-
>>   drivers/perf/Makefile                             |   4 +-
>>   drivers/perf/{riscv_pmu.c => riscv_pmu_common.c}  |   0
>>   drivers/perf/{riscv_pmu_sbi.c => riscv_pmu_dev.c} | 214 +++++++++++++---------
> 
> I'm still against this renaming churn. It sucks for backporting and
> you're also changing the name of the driver, which could be used by
> scripts in userspace (e.g. module listings, udev rules, cmdline options)
> 


Ok. I will revert the file and driver name change. I hope config 
renaming and code refactoring to separate counter delegation (hw method) 
vs SBI calls (firmware assisted method) are okay ?


> Will
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> linux-riscv at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv