[PATCHv2 3/4] arm-cci: Add routines to enable/disable all counters

Suzuki K. Poulose Suzuki.Poulose at arm.com
Thu Nov 5 09:52:37 PST 2015

On 05/11/15 17:27, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> Can we not get rid of the mask entirely? The combination of used_mask
>>> and each event's hwc->state tells us which counters are actually in use.
>> The problem is that neither hwc->state nor the cci_pmu->hw_events->events is
>> protected by pmu_lock, while enable/disable counter is. So we cannot really
>> rely on ((struct perf_event *)(cci_pmu->hw_events->events[counter]))->hw->state.
> They must be protected somehow, or we'd have races against cross-calls
> and/or the interrupt handler.

> Are we protected due to being cpu-affine with interrupts disabled when
> modifying these, is there some other mechanism that protects us, or do
> we have additional problems here?

Each perf_event is allocated a counter id atomically using the bit mask. So,
once the id is allocated nobody messes with that id from the PMU side. And,
the hw->state may have its own protection within the generic perf layer(which
I haven't checked).


More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list