Apparently pmu_event_sel is offset by 8 for all CCLA nodes, not just
the CCLA_RNI combination type.
Fixes: 23760a014417 ("perf/arm-cmn: Add CMN-700 support")
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
---
drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
index fd2122a37f22..0e2e12e2f4fb 100644
--- a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
+++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
@@ -2393,10 +2393,13 @@ static int arm_cmn_discover(struct arm_cmn *cmn, unsigned int rgn_offset)
case CMN_TYPE_CXHA:
case CMN_TYPE_CCRA:
case CMN_TYPE_CCHA:
- case CMN_TYPE_CCLA:
case CMN_TYPE_HNS:
dn++;
break;
+ case CMN_TYPE_CCLA:
+ dn->pmu_base += CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL;
+ dn++;
+ break;
/* Nothing to see here */
case CMN_TYPE_MPAM_S:
case CMN_TYPE_MPAM_NS:
--
2.39.2.101.g768bb238c484.dirty
On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 08:15:41PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Apparently pmu_event_sel is offset by 8 for all CCLA nodes, not just
> the CCLA_RNI combination type.
Was there some reason we used to think that was specific to CCLA_RNI
nodes, or was that just an oversight?
Looking at the CMN-700 TRM and scanning for pmu_event_sel, we have:
16'h2000 por_ccg_ha_pmu_event_sel
16'h2000 por_ccg_ra_pmu_event_sel
16'h2008 por_ccla_pmu_event_sel
16'h2000 por_dn_pmu_event_sel
16'h2000 cmn_hns_pmu_event_sel
16'h2000 por_hni_pmu_event_sel
16'h2008 por_hnp_pmu_event_sel
16'h2000 por_mxp_pmu_event_sel
16'h2000 por_rnd_pmu_event_sel
16'h2000 por_rni_pmu_event_sel
16'h2000 por_sbsx_pmu_event_sel
> Fixes: 23760a014417 ("perf/arm-cmn: Add CMN-700 support")
> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
> ---
> drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
> index fd2122a37f22..0e2e12e2f4fb 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
> @@ -2393,10 +2393,13 @@ static int arm_cmn_discover(struct arm_cmn *cmn, unsigned int rgn_offset)
> case CMN_TYPE_CXHA:
> case CMN_TYPE_CCRA:
> case CMN_TYPE_CCHA:
> - case CMN_TYPE_CCLA:
> case CMN_TYPE_HNS:
> dn++;
> break;
> + case CMN_TYPE_CCLA:
> + dn->pmu_base += CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL;
> + dn++;
> + break;
When reading this for the first time, it looks like a copy-paste error
since CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL doesn't have any obvious relationship with
CCLA nodes.
I reckon it'd be worth adding CMN_CCLA_PMU_EVENT_SEL, and replacing the
existing comment above the definition of CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL, e.g.
/*
* Some nodes place common registers at different offsets from most
* other nodes.
*/
#define CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL 0x008
#define CMN_CCLA_PMU_EVENT_SEL 0x008
That way the switch looks less suspicious, and the comment is a bit more
helpful to anyone trying to figure out what's going on here.
With that:
Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Mark.
> /* Nothing to see here */
> case CMN_TYPE_MPAM_S:
> case CMN_TYPE_MPAM_NS:
> --
> 2.39.2.101.g768bb238c484.dirty
>
On 16/08/2024 11:00 am, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 08:15:41PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> Apparently pmu_event_sel is offset by 8 for all CCLA nodes, not just
>> the CCLA_RNI combination type.
>
> Was there some reason we used to think that was specific to CCLA_RNI
> nodes, or was that just an oversight?
I imagine it was just oversight/confusion helped by the original r0p0
TRM listing both a por_ccla_pmu_event_sel and a
por_ccla_rni_pmu_event_sel as CCLA registers, which I could well believe
I misread at a glance while scrolling up and down.
> Looking at the CMN-700 TRM and scanning for pmu_event_sel, we have:
>
> 16'h2000 por_ccg_ha_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2000 por_ccg_ra_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2008 por_ccla_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2000 por_dn_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2000 cmn_hns_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2000 por_hni_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2008 por_hnp_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2000 por_mxp_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2000 por_rnd_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2000 por_rni_pmu_event_sel
> 16'h2000 por_sbsx_pmu_event_sel
>
>> Fixes: 23760a014417 ("perf/arm-cmn: Add CMN-700 support")
>> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c | 5 ++++-
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
>> index fd2122a37f22..0e2e12e2f4fb 100644
>> --- a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
>> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
>> @@ -2393,10 +2393,13 @@ static int arm_cmn_discover(struct arm_cmn *cmn, unsigned int rgn_offset)
>> case CMN_TYPE_CXHA:
>> case CMN_TYPE_CCRA:
>> case CMN_TYPE_CCHA:
>> - case CMN_TYPE_CCLA:
>> case CMN_TYPE_HNS:
>> dn++;
>> break;
>> + case CMN_TYPE_CCLA:
>> + dn->pmu_base += CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL;
>> + dn++;
>> + break;
>
> When reading this for the first time, it looks like a copy-paste error
> since CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL doesn't have any obvious relationship with
> CCLA nodes.
>
> I reckon it'd be worth adding CMN_CCLA_PMU_EVENT_SEL, and replacing the
> existing comment above the definition of CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL, e.g.
>
> /*
> * Some nodes place common registers at different offsets from most
> * other nodes.
> */
> #define CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL 0x008
> #define CMN_CCLA_PMU_EVENT_SEL 0x008
>
> That way the switch looks less suspicious, and the comment is a bit more
> helpful to anyone trying to figure out what's going on here.
Sure, that's a reasonable argument.
> With that:
>
> Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Thanks,
Robin.
>
> Mark.
>
>> /* Nothing to see here */
>> case CMN_TYPE_MPAM_S:
>> case CMN_TYPE_MPAM_NS:
>> --
>> 2.39.2.101.g768bb238c484.dirty
>>
Hi Robin,
Sorry for replying late but I just got back from my vacation
On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 16/08/2024 11:00 am, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 08:15:41PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>> Apparently pmu_event_sel is offset by 8 for all CCLA nodes, not just
>>> the CCLA_RNI combination type.
>>
>> Was there some reason we used to think that was specific to CCLA_RNI
>> nodes, or was that just an oversight?
>
> I imagine it was just oversight/confusion helped by the original r0p0 TRM
> listing both a por_ccla_pmu_event_sel and a por_ccla_rni_pmu_event_sel as
> CCLA registers, which I could well believe I misread at a glance while
> scrolling up and down.
>
>> Looking at the CMN-700 TRM and scanning for pmu_event_sel, we have:
>>
>> 16'h2000 por_ccg_ha_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2000 por_ccg_ra_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2008 por_ccla_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2000 por_dn_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2000 cmn_hns_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2000 por_hni_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2008 por_hnp_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2000 por_mxp_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2000 por_rnd_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2000 por_rni_pmu_event_sel
>> 16'h2000 por_sbsx_pmu_event_sel
>>
>>> Fixes: 23760a014417 ("perf/arm-cmn: Add CMN-700 support")
>>> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c | 5 ++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
>>> index fd2122a37f22..0e2e12e2f4fb 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
>>> @@ -2393,10 +2393,13 @@ static int arm_cmn_discover(struct arm_cmn *cmn,
>>> unsigned int rgn_offset)
>>> case CMN_TYPE_CXHA:
>>> case CMN_TYPE_CCRA:
>>> case CMN_TYPE_CCHA:
>>> - case CMN_TYPE_CCLA:
>>> case CMN_TYPE_HNS:
>>> dn++;
>>> break;
>>> + case CMN_TYPE_CCLA:
>>> + dn->pmu_base += CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL;
>>> + dn++;
>>> + break;
>>
>> When reading this for the first time, it looks like a copy-paste error
>> since CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL doesn't have any obvious relationship with
>> CCLA nodes.
>>
>> I reckon it'd be worth adding CMN_CCLA_PMU_EVENT_SEL, and replacing the
>> existing comment above the definition of CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL, e.g.
>>
>> /*
>> * Some nodes place common registers at different offsets from most
>> * other nodes.
>> */
>> #define CMN_HNP_PMU_EVENT_SEL 0x008
>> #define CMN_CCLA_PMU_EVENT_SEL 0x008
>>
>> That way the switch looks less suspicious, and the comment is a bit more
>> helpful to anyone trying to figure out what's going on here.
>
> Sure, that's a reasonable argument.
>
>> With that:
>>
>> Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>
> Thanks,
> Robin.
I like Mark's idea. With the change,
Reviewed-by: Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka@os.amperecomputing.com>
Cheers, Ilkka
>
>>
>> Mark.
>>
>>> /* Nothing to see here */
>>> case CMN_TYPE_MPAM_S:
>>> case CMN_TYPE_MPAM_NS:
>>> --
>>> 2.39.2.101.g768bb238c484.dirty
>>>
>
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.