[PATCH 1/4] arm: provide a mechanism to reserve performance counters
Will Deacon
will.deacon at arm.com
Fri Dec 11 12:17:59 EST 2009
> From: Jamie Iles [mailto:jamie.iles at picochip.com]
> Sent: 11 December 2009 15:42
> > What do you think?
> That sounds like a good plan. How about something like this?
>
> #define MAX_PMU_IRQS 8 /* Maximum number of IRQs for the PMU(s). */
> struct pmu_irqs {
> int irqs[MAX_PMU_IRQS];
> unsigned num_irqs;
> };
>
> /**
> * reserve_pmu() - reserve the hardware performance counters
> *
> * Reserve the hardware performance counters in the system for exclusive use.
> * The 'struct pmu_irqs' for the system is returned on success, ERR_PTR()
> * encoded error on failure.
> */
> struct pmu_irqs *
> reserve_pmu(void);
>
> /**
> * release_pmu() - Relinquish control of the performance counters
> *
> * Release the performance counters and allow someone else to use them.
> * Callers must have disabled the counters and released IRQs before calling
> * this. The 'struct pmu_irqs' returned from reserve_pmu() must be passed as
> * a cookie.
> */
> void
> release_pmu(struct pmu_irqs *irqs);
That looks good to me. This allows SMP systems to set the affinity of the PMU
IRQs too if need be - or should this also be done here? It might also be worth making
the returned struct const to stop people poking, but I'm not sure.
I've got some oprofile patches which I hope to post soon - I'll put a note in the
covering letter to say they should be modified to use these PMU functions when they make
it in.
Will
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list