diff mbox series

perf/arm-cmn: don't claim resource during ioremap() for CMN700 with ACPI

Message ID 20250218012111.30068-1-fengwei_yin@linux.alibaba.com (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series perf/arm-cmn: don't claim resource during ioremap() for CMN700 with ACPI | expand

Commit Message

YinFengwei Feb. 18, 2025, 1:21 a.m. UTC
Currently, arm-cmn PMU driver assumes ACPI claim resource
for CMN600 + ACPI. But with CMN700 + ACPI, the device probe
failed because of resource claim failes when ioremap() is
called:
[   10.837300] arm-cmn ARMHC700:00: error -EBUSY: can't request region for resource [mem 0x40000000-0x4fffffff]
[   10.847310] arm-cmn ARMHC700:00: probe with driver arm-cmn failed with error -16
[   10.854726] arm-cmn ARMHC700:02: error -EBUSY: can't request region for resource [mem 0x40040000000-0x4004fffffff]
[   10.865085] arm-cmn ARMHC700:02: probe with driver arm-cmn failed with error -16

Let CMN700 + ACPI do same as CMN600 + ACPI to allow CMN700
work in ACPI env.

Signed-off-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei_yin@linux.alibaba.com>
---
I am also wondering whether we could just drop the CMN600 part id
check here if ACPI companion device claimed the resource?

 drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

YinFengwei Feb. 18, 2025, 1:43 a.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 09:21:11AM +0800, Yin Fengwei wrote:
> Currently, arm-cmn PMU driver assumes ACPI claim resource
> for CMN600 + ACPI. But with CMN700 + ACPI, the device probe
> failed because of resource claim failes when ioremap() is
> called:
> [   10.837300] arm-cmn ARMHC700:00: error -EBUSY: can't request region for resource [mem 0x40000000-0x4fffffff]
> [   10.847310] arm-cmn ARMHC700:00: probe with driver arm-cmn failed with error -16
> [   10.854726] arm-cmn ARMHC700:02: error -EBUSY: can't request region for resource [mem 0x40040000000-0x4004fffffff]
> [   10.865085] arm-cmn ARMHC700:02: probe with driver arm-cmn failed with error -16
> 
> Let CMN700 + ACPI do same as CMN600 + ACPI to allow CMN700
> work in ACPI env.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei_yin@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> I am also wondering whether we could just drop the CMN600 part id
> check here if ACPI companion device claimed the resource?
> 
Sorry. Just saw the link
https://lore.kernel.org/all/1676535470-120560-1-git-send-email-renyu.zj@linux.alibaba.com/
after I hit send button. May continue the discussion there. Thanks.


Regards
Yin, Fengwei
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
index ef959e66db7c..8b5322a2aa6e 100644
--- a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
+++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c
@@ -2559,7 +2559,8 @@  static int arm_cmn_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	cmn->part = (unsigned long)device_get_match_data(cmn->dev);
 	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, cmn);
 
-	if (cmn->part == PART_CMN600 && has_acpi_companion(cmn->dev)) {
+	if (((cmn->part == PART_CMN600) || (cmn->part == PART_CMN700)) &&
+			has_acpi_companion(cmn->dev)) {
 		rootnode = arm_cmn600_acpi_probe(pdev, cmn);
 	} else {
 		rootnode = 0;
@@ -2649,7 +2650,7 @@  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, arm_cmn_of_match);
 static const struct acpi_device_id arm_cmn_acpi_match[] = {
 	{ "ARMHC600", PART_CMN600 },
 	{ "ARMHC650" },
-	{ "ARMHC700" },
+	{ "ARMHC700", PART_CMN700 },
 	{}
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, arm_cmn_acpi_match);