* [PATCH 0/2] Support clock domains without a PMU instance
@ 2026-01-26 3:30 Baisheng Gao
2026-01-26 3:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf/arm-ni: Don't crash in probing " Baisheng Gao
2026-01-26 3:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings/perf: Drop irqs for " Baisheng Gao
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Baisheng Gao @ 2026-01-26 3:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Murphy, Will Deacon, Mark Rutland, Rob Herring,
Krzysztof Kozlowski, Conor Dooley
Cc: cixi.geng, hao_hao.wang, linux-arm-kernel, linux-perf-users,
linux-kernel, devicetree
In a system, it is possible that there isn't a PMU instance in some
clock domains. The original driver will crash because of the pmusela
pointer being NULL in this condition. This series fix it.
Baisheng Gao (2):
perf/arm-ni: Don't crash in probing clock domains without a PMU
instance
dt-bindings/perf: Drop irqs for clock domains without a PMU instance
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml | 3 ++-
drivers/perf/arm-ni.c | 8 +++++++-
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Signed-off-by: Baisheng Gao <baisheng.gao@unisoc.com>
--
2.34.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [PATCH 1/2] perf/arm-ni: Don't crash in probing clock domains without a PMU instance 2026-01-26 3:30 [PATCH 0/2] Support clock domains without a PMU instance Baisheng Gao @ 2026-01-26 3:30 ` Baisheng Gao 2026-01-26 16:34 ` Robin Murphy 2026-01-26 3:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings/perf: Drop irqs for " Baisheng Gao 1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Baisheng Gao @ 2026-01-26 3:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Robin Murphy, Will Deacon, Mark Rutland, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Conor Dooley Cc: cixi.geng, hao_hao.wang, linux-arm-kernel, linux-perf-users, linux-kernel, devicetree The NULL pmusela pointer implies that current clock domain doesn't have a PMU instance. Return 0 for probing the next clock domain. Otherwise a kernel crash will happen. Signed-off-by: Baisheng Gao <baisheng.gao@unisoc.com> --- drivers/perf/arm-ni.c | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-ni.c b/drivers/perf/arm-ni.c index 66858c65215d..53b656983da1 100644 --- a/drivers/perf/arm-ni.c +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-ni.c @@ -526,6 +526,7 @@ static int arm_ni_init_cd(struct arm_ni *ni, struct arm_ni_node *node, u64 res_s { struct arm_ni_cd *cd = ni->cds + node->id; const char *name; + static atomic_t id; cd->id = node->id; cd->num_units = node->num_components; @@ -562,6 +563,11 @@ static int arm_ni_init_cd(struct arm_ni *ni, struct arm_ni_node *node, u64 res_s case NI_TMNI: case NI_CMNI: unit->pmusela = arm_ni_get_pmusel(ni, unit_base); + if (!unit->pmusela) { + dev_info(ni->dev, "No have PMU %d\n", cd->id); + devm_kfree(ni->dev, cd->units); + return 0; + } writel_relaxed(1, unit->pmusela); if (readl_relaxed(unit->pmusela) != 1) dev_info(ni->dev, "No access to node 0x%04x%04x\n", unit->id, unit->type); @@ -591,7 +597,7 @@ static int arm_ni_init_cd(struct arm_ni *ni, struct arm_ni_node *node, u64 res_s writel_relaxed(U32_MAX, cd->pmu_base + NI_PMCNTENCLR); writel_relaxed(U32_MAX, cd->pmu_base + NI_PMOVSCLR); - cd->irq = platform_get_irq(to_platform_device(ni->dev), cd->id); + cd->irq = platform_get_irq(to_platform_device(ni->dev), atomic_fetch_inc(&id)); if (cd->irq < 0) return cd->irq; -- 2.34.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf/arm-ni: Don't crash in probing clock domains without a PMU instance 2026-01-26 3:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf/arm-ni: Don't crash in probing " Baisheng Gao @ 2026-01-26 16:34 ` Robin Murphy 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Robin Murphy @ 2026-01-26 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Baisheng Gao, Will Deacon, Mark Rutland, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Conor Dooley Cc: cixi.geng, hao_hao.wang, linux-arm-kernel, linux-perf-users, linux-kernel, devicetree On 2026-01-26 3:30 am, Baisheng Gao wrote: > The NULL pmusela pointer implies that current clock domain doesn't have > a PMU instance. Return 0 for probing the next clock domain. Otherwise a > kernel crash will happen. Sorry, this doesn't add up with the diff below. All of the documentation says that the PMU is in integral part of the clock domain, and I can find no mention of any configuration parameter allowing it to be omitted. It is possible for the PMU registers to be inaccessible because Non-Secure access has not been enabled, but we account for that already. > Signed-off-by: Baisheng Gao <baisheng.gao@unisoc.com> > --- > drivers/perf/arm-ni.c | 8 +++++++- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-ni.c b/drivers/perf/arm-ni.c > index 66858c65215d..53b656983da1 100644 > --- a/drivers/perf/arm-ni.c > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-ni.c > @@ -526,6 +526,7 @@ static int arm_ni_init_cd(struct arm_ni *ni, struct arm_ni_node *node, u64 res_s > { > struct arm_ni_cd *cd = ni->cds + node->id; > const char *name; > + static atomic_t id; > > cd->id = node->id; > cd->num_units = node->num_components; > @@ -562,6 +563,11 @@ static int arm_ni_init_cd(struct arm_ni *ni, struct arm_ni_node *node, u64 res_s > case NI_TMNI: > case NI_CMNI: > unit->pmusela = arm_ni_get_pmusel(ni, unit_base); > + if (!unit->pmusela) { ...However this is not about the PMU node anyway; this would represent the FCU at an interface node being missing. Again, it's possible for access to the FCU itself to be restricted, per the test below, but the subfeature ID registers should always be readable, and per the "Should be impossible" comment in arm_ni_get_pmusel(), the nodes that can generate PMU events should always include an FCU. Could you please clarify some more details of what the exact situation is that you're trying to deal with here? > + dev_info(ni->dev, "No have PMU %d\n", cd->id); > + devm_kfree(ni->dev, cd->units); > + return 0; > + } > writel_relaxed(1, unit->pmusela); > if (readl_relaxed(unit->pmusela) != 1) > dev_info(ni->dev, "No access to node 0x%04x%04x\n", unit->id, unit->type); > @@ -591,7 +597,7 @@ static int arm_ni_init_cd(struct arm_ni *ni, struct arm_ni_node *node, u64 res_s > writel_relaxed(U32_MAX, cd->pmu_base + NI_PMCNTENCLR); > writel_relaxed(U32_MAX, cd->pmu_base + NI_PMOVSCLR); > > - cd->irq = platform_get_irq(to_platform_device(ni->dev), cd->id); > + cd->irq = platform_get_irq(to_platform_device(ni->dev), atomic_fetch_inc(&id)); This is clearly wrong. Disregarding how badly it would go with multiple NI instances, even within a single instance I don';t think there's any obvious guarantee of a stable order. The firmware bindings are already defined, and that definition is not "the order in which a particular version of the Linux driver happens to parse things". Thanks, Robin. > if (cd->irq < 0) > return cd->irq; > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings/perf: Drop irqs for clock domains without a PMU instance 2026-01-26 3:30 [PATCH 0/2] Support clock domains without a PMU instance Baisheng Gao 2026-01-26 3:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf/arm-ni: Don't crash in probing " Baisheng Gao @ 2026-01-26 3:30 ` Baisheng Gao 2026-01-26 17:09 ` Robin Murphy 1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Baisheng Gao @ 2026-01-26 3:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Robin Murphy, Will Deacon, Mark Rutland, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Conor Dooley Cc: cixi.geng, hao_hao.wang, linux-arm-kernel, linux-perf-users, linux-kernel, devicetree No need to specify the interrupts for the clock domains without a PMU instance. Signed-off-by: Baisheng Gao <baisheng.gao@unisoc.com> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml index d66fffa256d5..40a5b8929ef2 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml @@ -20,7 +20,8 @@ properties: interrupts: minItems: 1 maxItems: 32 - description: Overflow interrupts, one per clock domain, in order of domain ID + description: Overflow interrupts, one per clock domain which has a PMU + instance, in order of domain ID. required: - compatible -- 2.34.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings/perf: Drop irqs for clock domains without a PMU instance 2026-01-26 3:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings/perf: Drop irqs for " Baisheng Gao @ 2026-01-26 17:09 ` Robin Murphy 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Robin Murphy @ 2026-01-26 17:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Baisheng Gao, Will Deacon, Mark Rutland, Rob Herring, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Conor Dooley Cc: cixi.geng, hao_hao.wang, linux-arm-kernel, linux-perf-users, linux-kernel, devicetree On 2026-01-26 3:30 am, Baisheng Gao wrote: > No need to specify the interrupts for the clock domains without a > PMU instance. Yes there is a need, because it's what the binding has already defined and systems are already implementing, so breaking compatibility at this point more than a year after its introduction is not really acceptable. And although there's no strict requirement for the DT and ACPI bindings to be equivalent, in this case they currently are, and it doesn't seem like you've accounted for ACPI here either. Fact is, the Arm NI-700, NI-710AE, NoC S3 and SI L1 designs do all define <CLKNAME>_nPMUINTERRUPT outputs for each <CLKNAME> domain, and the intent of the binding was always to describe the hardware. If it's the case that one or more of those interrupts are not wired up at all (and presumably the corresponding PMU is never exposed to Non-Secure, since it's unlikely to be useful), then at worst it's reasonable to use dummy entries to pad the array. If on the other hand you really have got something that is mangled to the point of not being compatible with the stock Arm designs, then it most likely warrants its own binding. Thanks, Robin. > Signed-off-by: Baisheng Gao <baisheng.gao@unisoc.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml > index d66fffa256d5..40a5b8929ef2 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/arm,ni.yaml > @@ -20,7 +20,8 @@ properties: > interrupts: > minItems: 1 > maxItems: 32 > - description: Overflow interrupts, one per clock domain, in order of domain ID > + description: Overflow interrupts, one per clock domain which has a PMU > + instance, in order of domain ID. > > required: > - compatible ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-01-26 17:23 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2026-01-26 3:30 [PATCH 0/2] Support clock domains without a PMU instance Baisheng Gao 2026-01-26 3:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf/arm-ni: Don't crash in probing " Baisheng Gao 2026-01-26 16:34 ` Robin Murphy 2026-01-26 3:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings/perf: Drop irqs for " Baisheng Gao 2026-01-26 17:09 ` Robin Murphy
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®