From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, irogers@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf: Remove unused PERF_PMU_CAP_HETEROGENEOUS_CPUS capability
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 13:00:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ca559765-0f07-b187-bdcd-826dcd99a312@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6143e1cd-4db7-d980-a189-b9b06f99d7c4@arm.com>
On 7/11/23 19:45, James Clark wrote:
>
>
> On 11/07/2023 13:10, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/10/23 17:51, James Clark wrote:
>>> Since commit bd2756811766 ("perf: Rewrite core context handling") the
>>> relationship between perf_event_context and PMUs has changed so that
>>> the error scenario that PERF_PMU_CAP_HETEROGENEOUS_CPUS originally
>>> silenced no longer exists.
>>>
>>> Remove the capability to avoid confusion that it actually influences
>>> any perf core behavior. This change should be a no-op.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/perf_event.h | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> index d5628a7b5eaa..3f4d941fd6c5 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
>>> @@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ struct perf_event_pmu_context;
>>> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_EXTENDED_REGS 0x0008
>>> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_EXCLUSIVE 0x0010
>>> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_ITRACE 0x0020
>>> -#define PERF_PMU_CAP_HETEROGENEOUS_CPUS 0x0040
>>> +/* Unused 0x0040 */
>>
>> Small nit, "Unused" marking might not be required here.
>>
>
> But then it would be very easy to miss that there is a free bit if I
> don't leave the comment. Is it really better without it?
>
> I could shift all the following ones down by one bit, but it would be a
Sounds as a better option IMHO.
> lot of work to make sure that nobody has hard coded some check for one
> of the bits instead of using the define somewhere.
These are not user visible ABI and hence defined in include/linux/perf_event.h
to be used by drivers registering a PMU for capability enumeration. I am just
wondering why they might have been hard coded any where ?
>
>>> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_EXCLUDE 0x0080
>>> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_AUX_OUTPUT 0x0100
>>> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_EXTENDED_HW_TYPE 0x0200
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-13 7:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-10 12:21 [PATCH 0/4] arm_pmu: Add PERF_PMU_CAP_EXTENDED_HW_TYPE capability James Clark
2023-07-10 12:21 ` [PATCH 1/4] " James Clark
2023-07-10 16:04 ` Ian Rogers
2023-07-11 12:01 ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-07-11 14:12 ` James Clark
2023-07-20 17:12 ` Ian Rogers
2023-07-21 10:21 ` Will Deacon
2023-07-24 13:46 ` James Clark
2023-07-10 12:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] perf/x86: Remove unused PERF_PMU_CAP_HETEROGENEOUS_CPUS capability James Clark
2023-07-10 16:07 ` Ian Rogers
2023-07-10 12:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm_pmu: " James Clark
2023-07-10 16:08 ` Ian Rogers
2023-07-11 12:08 ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-07-11 14:04 ` James Clark
2023-07-10 12:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] perf: " James Clark
2023-07-10 16:09 ` Ian Rogers
2023-07-11 12:10 ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-07-11 14:15 ` James Clark
2023-07-13 7:30 ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2023-07-13 9:15 ` James Clark
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ca559765-0f07-b187-bdcd-826dcd99a312@arm.com \
--to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@arm.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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®