[PATCH 0/2] perf/smmuv3: Support devicetree

[Jean-Philippe Brucker]

On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 12:02:47PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2021-11-16 11:35, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > Add devicetree binding for the SMMUv3 PMU, called Performance Monitoring
> > Counter Group (PMCG) in the spec. Each SMMUv3 implementation can have
> > multiple independent PMCGs, for example one for the Translation Control
> > Unit (TCU) and one per Translation Buffer Unit (TBU).
> > 
> > I previously sent the binding as reply to Jay Chen's thread implementing
> > device tree support [1]. This posting addresses the comments from that
> > thread.
> 
> Ha, I'd also resurrected this and was planning to post it at some point this
> week[0] - you should have said :)

Ah sorry about that, I just resent because there was some demand for it at
Linaro

> > Patch 1 adds two compatible strings. "arm,smmu-v3-pmcg" is common to all
> > PMCGs. "hisilicon,smmu-v3-pmcg-hip08" allows to support the same quirk
> > as IORT for that implementation (see patch 2). We'll probably want to
> > also introduce compatible strings for each implementation that has
> > additional perf events. For example the MMU-600 implementation has
> > different events for TCU and TBU PMCGs [2], but both components have the
> > same device IDs. So the driver could differentiate them if they had two
> > distinct compatible strings such as "arm,mmu-600-pmcg-tbu" and
> > "arm,mmu-600-pmcg-tcu".
> 
> Actually it only needs a general MMU-600 compatible, since once you know
> it's an Arm Ltd. implementation, you can assume the pattern for the IMP_DEF
> ID registers to figure out the rest.

It might be an error in the MMU-600 spec specifically, both TBU and TCU
PMU registers have a 0x83 PIDR0, where I think the TBU should be 0x84 (the
revC model uses that value). It's possible that the implementation
actually has 0x84 instead.

Thanks,
Jean