From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8BCF8615A for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2025 16:08:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750090096; cv=none; b=sDadcN6QgZ+XPA+hjdi17/QGKOupZjUxWVqThlMbz/9d/dyySKrrbUmOul9lZwqr3e1f54XLtBpgZRrXJjajOpGSOCI+kPQ+PSj4h0Tj6fVo2nJQuoWyyCDnHQ0UaFNLJDSv86hf7GsriroYSt7mY28CIdK193sCRdqSGy1R9XM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750090096; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nVULoYO6Vqsb9LSRiR3T/PI42YG97CzMGnwBwIWNtt8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=XQZNOqiEhDg4epMKz57HSs90moXU3l6BEeRYRQOqcnrHgZZhYf29MDKAiMczgH6unucF1q14IXhYDdzkKQ6pELlrenYFLl6Jp1eziGmFi57MssKzY3H/TuePhvwwsK41Y24uClGewHzXU0lMn6uQHKF0zkYsjQIPAhq73zxGSGU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 606641515; Mon, 16 Jun 2025 09:07:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (e132581.arm.com [10.1.196.87]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 593B23F673; Mon, 16 Jun 2025 09:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 17:08:11 +0100 From: Leo Yan To: Yicong Yang Cc: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi , yangyicong@hisilicon.com, James Clark , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Ali Saidi , Leo Yan , Will Deacon , James Morse , Catalin Marinas , yangjinqian , Douglas Anderson , Dmitry Baryshkov , Adrian Hunter , Ian Rogers , Jiri Olsa , Kan Liang , Namhyung Kim , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: perf usage of arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h Message-ID: <20250616160811.GA794930@e132581.arm.com> References: <1762acd6-df55-c10b-e396-2c6ed37d16c1@huawei.com> <2abcf4ec-4725-4e79-b8d3-a4ddbc00caba@linaro.org> <0b839ec1ae89439e95d7069adcbb95ab@huawei.com> <20250616130736.GA788469@e132581.arm.com> <2dc510b4-ff3d-edff-42be-f8260cd27840@huawei.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2dc510b4-ff3d-edff-42be-f8260cd27840@huawei.com> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 11:04:08PM +0800, Yicong Yang wrote: [...] > >> +static bool is_perf_midr_in_range_list(u32 midr, struct midr_range > >> const *ranges) > >> +{ > >> + while (ranges->model) { > >> + if (midr_is_cpu_model_range(midr, ranges->model, > >> + ranges->rv_min, ranges->rv_max)) { > >> + return true; > >> + } > >> + ranges++; > >> + } > >> + return false; > >> +} > > > > Maybe we can make it more general. For example, move this function into > > a common header such as tools/perf/arch/arm64/include/cputype.h. Then, > > util/arm-spe.c can include this header. > > > > ok this sounds just like as before except rename the midr check function and modify the > users in perf. will do in below steps: > - move cpu_errata_set_target_impl()/is_midr_in_range_list() out of cputype.h > since they're only used in the kernel with errata information > - introduce is_target_midr_in_range_list() in cputype.h to test certain MIDR > is within the ranges. (is_perf_midr_in_range_list() only make sense in > userspace and is a bit strange to me in a kernel header). maybe reimplement > is_midr_in_range_list() with is_target_midr_in_range_list() otherwise there's > no users in kernel > - copy cputype.h to userspace and make users use new is_target_midr_in_range_list() > > this will avoid touching the kernel too much and userspace don't need to implement > a separate function. My understanding is we don't need to touch anything in kernel side, we simply add a wrapper in perf tool to call midr_is_cpu_model_range(). When introduce is_target_midr_in_range_list() in kernel's cputype.h, if no consumers in kernel use it and only useful for perf tool, then it is unlikely to be accepted. Thanks, Leo