[PATCH v2 1/3] perf: xgene: Parse PMU subnode from the match table

[Hoan Tran]

Hi Mark

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com> wrote:
> Hi Hoan,
>
> Apologies for the last reply.
>
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 09:47:55AM -0700, Hoan Tran wrote:
>> +static const struct acpi_device_id xgene_pmu_acpi_type_match[] = {
>> +     {"APMC0D5D", PMU_TYPE_L3C},
>> +     {"APMC0D5E", PMU_TYPE_IOB},
>> +     {"APMC0D5F", PMU_TYPE_MCB},
>> +     {"APMC0D60", PMU_TYPE_MC},
>> +     {},
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct acpi_device_id *xgene_pmu_acpi_match_type(
>> +                                     const struct acpi_device_id *ids,
>> +                                     struct acpi_device *adev)
>> +{
>> +     const struct acpi_device_id *match_id = NULL;
>> +     const struct acpi_device_id *id;
>> +
>> +     for (id = ids; id->id[0] || id->cls; id++) {
>> +             if (!acpi_match_device_ids(adev, id))
>> +                     match_id = id;
>> +             else if (match_id)
>> +                     break;
>> +     }
>> +
>> +     return match_id;
>> +}
>
> I don't believe this look is necessary. AFAICT, acpi_match_device_ids()
> already iterates over the id table it is given.

The acpi_match_device_ids() function just returns if a device ID is
available on the given list. It does not return the first matching ID.
That's the reason I created this function to find the first matching ID.

>
>> +
>>  static acpi_status acpi_pmu_dev_add(acpi_handle handle, u32 level,
>>                                   void *data, void **return_value)
>>  {
>> +     const struct acpi_device_id *acpi_id;
>>       struct xgene_pmu *xgene_pmu = data;
>>       struct xgene_pmu_dev_ctx *ctx;
>>       struct acpi_device *adev;
>> @@ -1059,17 +1085,11 @@ static acpi_status acpi_pmu_dev_add(acpi_handle handle, u32 level,
>>       if (acpi_bus_get_status(adev) || !adev->status.present)
>>               return AE_OK;
>>
>> -     if (!strcmp(acpi_device_hid(adev), "APMC0D5D"))
>> -             ctx = acpi_get_pmu_hw_inf(xgene_pmu, adev, PMU_TYPE_L3C);
>> -     else if (!strcmp(acpi_device_hid(adev), "APMC0D5E"))
>> -             ctx = acpi_get_pmu_hw_inf(xgene_pmu, adev, PMU_TYPE_IOB);
>> -     else if (!strcmp(acpi_device_hid(adev), "APMC0D5F"))
>> -             ctx = acpi_get_pmu_hw_inf(xgene_pmu, adev, PMU_TYPE_MCB);
>> -     else if (!strcmp(acpi_device_hid(adev), "APMC0D60"))
>> -             ctx = acpi_get_pmu_hw_inf(xgene_pmu, adev, PMU_TYPE_MC);
>> -     else
>> -             ctx = NULL;
>> +     acpi_id = xgene_pmu_acpi_match_type(xgene_pmu_acpi_type_match, adev);
>> +     if (!acpi_id)
>> +             return AE_OK;
>
> As above, and as I covered in my reply to v1, I think the above should
> be:
>
>         acpi_id = acpi_match_device_ids(adev, xgene_pmu_acpi_type_match);
>         if (!acpi_id)
>                 return AE_OK;
>
> ... or am I missing something?

The same above.

Thanks
Hoan

>
> With that change:
>
> Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
>>
>> +     ctx = acpi_get_pmu_hw_inf(xgene_pmu, adev, (u32)acpi_id->driver_data);
>>       if (!ctx)
>>               return AE_OK;
>>
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>