[PATCH 3/5] arm_pmu: acpi: check for mismatched PPIs
Will Deacon
will.deacon at arm.com
Mon Dec 11 10:43:37 PST 2017
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 06:08:31PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 05:37:07PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 02:12:37PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > The arm_pmu platform code explicitly checks for mismatched PPIs at probe
> > > time, while the ACPI code leaves this to the core code. Future
> > > refactoring will make this difficult for the core code to check, so
> > > let's have the ACPI code check this explicitly.
> > >
> > > As before, upon a failure we'll continue on without an interrupt. Ho
> > > hum.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
> > > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon at arm.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c | 16 ++++------------
> > > drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > > 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> > > index 3d6d4c5f2356..e0242103d904 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> > > @@ -557,18 +557,10 @@ int armpmu_request_irq(struct arm_pmu *armpmu, int cpu)
> > > if (!irq)
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > - if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq) && cpumask_empty(&armpmu->active_irqs)) {
> > > - err = request_percpu_irq(irq, handler, "arm-pmu",
> > > - &hw_events->percpu_pmu);
> > > - } else if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)) {
> > > - int other_cpu = cpumask_first(&armpmu->active_irqs);
> > > - int other_irq = per_cpu(hw_events->irq, other_cpu);
> > > -
> > > - if (irq != other_irq) {
> > > - pr_warn("mismatched PPIs detected.\n");
> > > - err = -EINVAL;
> > > - goto err_out;
> > > - }
> > > + if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)) {
> > > + if (cpumask_empty(&armpmu->active_irqs))
> >
> > Why not leave this as before, with a '&&' operator?
>
> Because then we'd fall into the else case (for SPIs), were the
> active_irqs mask empty.
>
> Previously, that would have been caught by the irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)
> case that got removed.
>
> I can instead make this:
>
> if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq) && cpumask_empty(&armpmu->active_irqs)) {
> err = request_percpu_irq(irq, handler, "arm-pmu",
> &hw_events->percpu_pmu);
> } else if (irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)) {
> /* nothing to do */
> } else {
> < SPI case >
> }
>
> ... but that seemed more painful to read.
Yeah, that's crazy :)
How about:
if (!irq_is_percpu_devid(irq)) {
/* SPI case */
} else if (cpumask_empty(&armpmu->active_irqs)) {
/* PPI case */
}
?
Will
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list