[PATCH] ARM: test for PMU feature on v7 (v2 with typo fix)
Nicolas Pitre
nico at fluxnic.net
Wed Mar 28 10:17:29 EDT 2012
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012, Will Deacon wrote:
> Now, if everything was device-tree based then we could simply use a
> different binding for each CPU but since we support perf on non-DT
> platforms, probing the CPU type is the best solution. I would like to avoid
> the probing code if we are initialised from DT, but I've not got round to it
> yet (this would be useful for big.LITTLE).
Still... my opinion is that we should try to autodetect as much as
possible and avoid overstuffing the DT with content that can otherwise
be run-time probed. OK to use DT to override the probe for corner
cases, but IMHO the probe should be the default method of
initialization. The rational is that we want to spread knowledge about
part of the system and have it confined into respective drivers and
subsystems for easier maintenance. If the guy who has to maintain the
dts has to know all the details for everything then that won't scale and
the risk for discrepancies is increased.
Nicolas
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list