| Message ID | 20190326223938.5365-4-jeremy.linton@arm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64: SPE ACPI enablement | expand |
On 26/03/2019 22:39, Jeremy Linton wrote: > ACPI 6.3 adds additional fields to the MADT GICC > structure to describe SPE PPI's. We pick these out > of the cached reference to the madt_gicc structure > similarly to the core PMU code. We then create a platform > device referring to the IRQ and let the user/module loader > decide whether to load the SPE driver. > > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h | 3 ++ > drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h > index 7628efbe6c12..d10399b9f998 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h > @@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ > (!(entry) || (entry)->header.length < ACPI_MADT_GICC_MIN_LENGTH || \ > (unsigned long)(entry) + (entry)->header.length > (end)) > > +#define ACPI_MADT_GICC_SPE (ACPI_OFFSET(struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt, \ > + spe_interrupt) + sizeof(u16)) > + > /* Basic configuration for ACPI */ > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > pgprot_t __acpi_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr); > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c > index 0f197516d708..a2418108eab2 100644 > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c > @@ -74,6 +74,73 @@ static void arm_pmu_acpi_unregister_irq(int cpu) > acpi_unregister_gsi(gsi); > } > > +static struct resource spe_resources[] = { > + { > + /* irq */ > + .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ, > + } > +}; > + > +static struct platform_device spe_dev = { > + .name = "arm,spe-v1", > + .id = -1, > + .resource = spe_resources, > + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(spe_resources) > +}; > + > +/* > + * For lack of a better place, It seems that the kernel Image size can now increase due to this part of SPE support even if ARM_SPE_PMU config is disabled. And I don't even think that ARM_SPE_PMU depends on ARM_PMU (which ARM_PMU_ACPI depends on). Thanks, John hook the normal PMU MADT walk > + * and create a SPE device if we detect a recent MADT with > + * a homogeneous PPI mapping. > + */ > +static int arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs(void) > +{ > + int cpu, ret, irq; > + int hetid; > + u16 gsi = 0; > + bool first = true; > + > + struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *gicc; > + > + /* > + * sanity check all the GICC tables for the same interrupt number > + * for now we only support homogeneous ACPI/SPE machines. > + */ > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { > + gicc = acpi_cpu_get_madt_gicc(cpu); > + > + if (gicc->header.length < ACPI_MADT_GICC_SPE) > + return -ENODEV; > + if (first) { > + gsi = gicc->spe_interrupt; > + if (!gsi) > + return -ENODEV; > + hetid = find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(cpu); > + first = false; > + } else if ((gsi != gicc->spe_interrupt) || > + (hetid != find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(cpu))) { > + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE must be homogeneous\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + } > + > + irq = acpi_register_gsi(NULL, gsi, ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE, > + ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH); > + if (irq < 0) { > + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE Unable to register interrupt: %d\n", gsi); > + return irq; > + } > + > + spe_resources[0].start = irq; > + ret = platform_device_register(&spe_dev); > + if (ret < 0) { > + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE: Unable to register device\n"); > + acpi_unregister_gsi(gsi); > + } > + > + return ret; > +} > + > static int arm_pmu_acpi_parse_irqs(void) > { > int irq, cpu, irq_cpu, err; > @@ -279,6 +346,8 @@ static int arm_pmu_acpi_init(void) > if (acpi_disabled) > return 0; > > + arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs(); /* failures are expected */ > + > ret = arm_pmu_acpi_parse_irqs(); > if (ret) > return ret; >
Hi, First thanks for taking a look at this, second sorry about the delay... On 3/28/19 7:40 AM, John Garry wrote: > On 26/03/2019 22:39, Jeremy Linton wrote: >> ACPI 6.3 adds additional fields to the MADT GICC >> structure to describe SPE PPI's. We pick these out >> of the cached reference to the madt_gicc structure >> similarly to the core PMU code. We then create a platform >> device referring to the IRQ and let the user/module loader >> decide whether to load the SPE driver. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> >> --- >> arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h | 3 ++ >> drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >> index 7628efbe6c12..d10399b9f998 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >> @@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ >> (!(entry) || (entry)->header.length < ACPI_MADT_GICC_MIN_LENGTH || \ >> (unsigned long)(entry) + (entry)->header.length > (end)) >> >> +#define ACPI_MADT_GICC_SPE (ACPI_OFFSET(struct >> acpi_madt_generic_interrupt, \ >> + spe_interrupt) + sizeof(u16)) >> + >> /* Basic configuration for ACPI */ >> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI >> pgprot_t __acpi_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr); >> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c >> index 0f197516d708..a2418108eab2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c >> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c >> @@ -74,6 +74,73 @@ static void arm_pmu_acpi_unregister_irq(int cpu) >> acpi_unregister_gsi(gsi); >> } >> >> +static struct resource spe_resources[] = { >> + { >> + /* irq */ >> + .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ, >> + } >> +}; >> + >> +static struct platform_device spe_dev = { >> + .name = "arm,spe-v1", >> + .id = -1, >> + .resource = spe_resources, >> + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(spe_resources) >> +}; >> + >> +/* >> + * For lack of a better place, > > It seems that the kernel Image size can now increase due to this part of > SPE support even if ARM_SPE_PMU config is disabled. That is true, but it should be fairly small. > > And I don't even think that ARM_SPE_PMU depends on ARM_PMU (which > ARM_PMU_ACPI depends on). Well I don't think we want the generic SPE_PMU dependent on ACPI. So this chunk of code could be wrapped in a SPE_PMU_ACPI block, and made dependent on PMU_ACPI. OTOH, It seems a little trivial for that, and maybe just tweaking the PMU_ACPI documentation to mention that it also enables ACPI/SPE is a better plan. Opinions? > > Thanks, > John > > hook the normal PMU MADT walk >> + * and create a SPE device if we detect a recent MADT with >> + * a homogeneous PPI mapping. >> + */ >> +static int arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs(void) >> +{ >> + int cpu, ret, irq; >> + int hetid; >> + u16 gsi = 0; >> + bool first = true; >> + >> + struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *gicc; >> + >> + /* >> + * sanity check all the GICC tables for the same interrupt number >> + * for now we only support homogeneous ACPI/SPE machines. >> + */ >> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { >> + gicc = acpi_cpu_get_madt_gicc(cpu); >> + >> + if (gicc->header.length < ACPI_MADT_GICC_SPE) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + if (first) { >> + gsi = gicc->spe_interrupt; >> + if (!gsi) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + hetid = find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(cpu); >> + first = false; >> + } else if ((gsi != gicc->spe_interrupt) || >> + (hetid != find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(cpu))) { >> + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE must be homogeneous\n"); >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + } >> + >> + irq = acpi_register_gsi(NULL, gsi, ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE, >> + ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH); >> + if (irq < 0) { >> + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE Unable to register interrupt: %d\n", gsi); >> + return irq; >> + } >> + >> + spe_resources[0].start = irq; >> + ret = platform_device_register(&spe_dev); >> + if (ret < 0) { >> + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE: Unable to register device\n"); >> + acpi_unregister_gsi(gsi); >> + } >> + >> + return ret; >> +} >> + >> static int arm_pmu_acpi_parse_irqs(void) >> { >> int irq, cpu, irq_cpu, err; >> @@ -279,6 +346,8 @@ static int arm_pmu_acpi_init(void) >> if (acpi_disabled) >> return 0; >> >> + arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs(); /* failures are expected */ >> + >> ret = arm_pmu_acpi_parse_irqs(); >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> > >
On 02/04/2019 20:14, Jeremy Linton wrote: > Hi, > > First thanks for taking a look at this, second sorry about the delay... > > On 3/28/19 7:40 AM, John Garry wrote: >> On 26/03/2019 22:39, Jeremy Linton wrote: >>> ACPI 6.3 adds additional fields to the MADT GICC >>> structure to describe SPE PPI's. We pick these out >>> of the cached reference to the madt_gicc structure >>> similarly to the core PMU code. We then create a platform >>> device referring to the IRQ and let the user/module loader >>> decide whether to load the SPE driver. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> >>> --- >>> arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h | 3 ++ >>> drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >>> index 7628efbe6c12..d10399b9f998 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h >>> @@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ >>> (!(entry) || (entry)->header.length < ACPI_MADT_GICC_MIN_LENGTH >>> || \ >>> (unsigned long)(entry) + (entry)->header.length > (end)) >>> >>> +#define ACPI_MADT_GICC_SPE (ACPI_OFFSET(struct >>> acpi_madt_generic_interrupt, \ >>> + spe_interrupt) + sizeof(u16)) >>> + >>> /* Basic configuration for ACPI */ >>> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI >>> pgprot_t __acpi_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr); >>> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c >>> index 0f197516d708..a2418108eab2 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c >>> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c >>> @@ -74,6 +74,73 @@ static void arm_pmu_acpi_unregister_irq(int cpu) >>> acpi_unregister_gsi(gsi); >>> } >>> >>> +static struct resource spe_resources[] = { >>> + { >>> + /* irq */ >>> + .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ, >>> + } >>> +}; >>> + >>> +static struct platform_device spe_dev = { >>> + .name = "arm,spe-v1", >>> + .id = -1, >>> + .resource = spe_resources, >>> + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(spe_resources) >>> +}; >>> + >>> +/* >>> + * For lack of a better place, >> >> It seems that the kernel Image size can now increase due to this part >> of SPE support even if ARM_SPE_PMU config is disabled. > > That is true, but it should be fairly small. > >> >> And I don't even think that ARM_SPE_PMU depends on ARM_PMU (which >> ARM_PMU_ACPI depends on). > > Well I don't think we want the generic SPE_PMU dependent on ACPI. Relevant code in the SPE driver could still be built under CONFIG_ACPI. It seems that the real problem is that some necessary ACPI-related symbols used in arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs() are not exported, while the SPE driver can be a loadable module. So > this chunk of code could be wrapped in a SPE_PMU_ACPI block, and made > dependent on PMU_ACPI. OTOH, It seems a little trivial for that, and > maybe just tweaking the PMU_ACPI documentation to mention that it also > enables ACPI/SPE is a better plan. > > Opinions? > > >> >> >> hook the normal PMU MADT walk >>> + * and create a SPE device if we detect a recent MADT with >>> + * a homogeneous PPI mapping. >>> + */ >>> +static int arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs(void) nit: it's doing a bit more than parsing IRQs >>> +{ >>> + int cpu, ret, irq; >>> + int hetid; >>> + u16 gsi = 0; >>> + bool first = true; Thanks, John >>> + >>> + struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *gicc; >>> + >>> + /* >>> + * sanity check all the GICC tables for the same interrupt number >>> + * for now we only support homogeneous ACPI/SPE machines. >>> + */ >>> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { >>> + gicc = acpi_cpu_get_madt_gicc(cpu); >>> + >>> + if (gicc->header.length < ACPI_MADT_GICC_SPE) >>> + return -ENODEV; >>> + if (first) { >>> + gsi = gicc->spe_interrupt; >>> + if (!gsi) >>> + return -ENODEV; >>> + hetid = find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(cpu); >>> + first = false; >>> + } else if ((gsi != gicc->spe_interrupt) || >>> + (hetid != find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(cpu))) { >>> + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE must be homogeneous\n"); >>> + return -EINVAL; >>> + } >>> + } >>> + >>> + irq = acpi_register_gsi(NULL, gsi, ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE, >>> + ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH); >>> + if (irq < 0) { >>> + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE Unable to register interrupt: %d\n", gsi); >>> + return irq; >>> + } >>> + >>> + spe_resources[0].start = irq; >>> + ret = platform_device_register(&spe_dev); >>> + if (ret < 0) { >>> + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE: Unable to register device\n"); >>> + acpi_unregister_gsi(gsi); >>> + } >>> + >>> + return ret; >>> +} >>> + >>> static int arm_pmu_acpi_parse_irqs(void) >>> { >>> int irq, cpu, irq_cpu, err; >>> @@ -279,6 +346,8 @@ static int arm_pmu_acpi_init(void) >>> if (acpi_disabled) >>> return 0; >>> >>> + arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs(); /* failures are expected */ >>> + >>> ret = arm_pmu_acpi_parse_irqs(); >>> if (ret) >>> return ret; >>> >> >> > > > . >
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h index 7628efbe6c12..d10399b9f998 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h @@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ (!(entry) || (entry)->header.length < ACPI_MADT_GICC_MIN_LENGTH || \ (unsigned long)(entry) + (entry)->header.length > (end)) +#define ACPI_MADT_GICC_SPE (ACPI_OFFSET(struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt, \ + spe_interrupt) + sizeof(u16)) + /* Basic configuration for ACPI */ #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI pgprot_t __acpi_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr); diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c index 0f197516d708..a2418108eab2 100644 --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c @@ -74,6 +74,73 @@ static void arm_pmu_acpi_unregister_irq(int cpu) acpi_unregister_gsi(gsi); } +static struct resource spe_resources[] = { + { + /* irq */ + .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ, + } +}; + +static struct platform_device spe_dev = { + .name = "arm,spe-v1", + .id = -1, + .resource = spe_resources, + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(spe_resources) +}; + +/* + * For lack of a better place, hook the normal PMU MADT walk + * and create a SPE device if we detect a recent MADT with + * a homogeneous PPI mapping. + */ +static int arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs(void) +{ + int cpu, ret, irq; + int hetid; + u16 gsi = 0; + bool first = true; + + struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *gicc; + + /* + * sanity check all the GICC tables for the same interrupt number + * for now we only support homogeneous ACPI/SPE machines. + */ + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { + gicc = acpi_cpu_get_madt_gicc(cpu); + + if (gicc->header.length < ACPI_MADT_GICC_SPE) + return -ENODEV; + if (first) { + gsi = gicc->spe_interrupt; + if (!gsi) + return -ENODEV; + hetid = find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(cpu); + first = false; + } else if ((gsi != gicc->spe_interrupt) || + (hetid != find_acpi_cpu_topology_hetero_id(cpu))) { + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE must be homogeneous\n"); + return -EINVAL; + } + } + + irq = acpi_register_gsi(NULL, gsi, ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE, + ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH); + if (irq < 0) { + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE Unable to register interrupt: %d\n", gsi); + return irq; + } + + spe_resources[0].start = irq; + ret = platform_device_register(&spe_dev); + if (ret < 0) { + pr_warn("ACPI: SPE: Unable to register device\n"); + acpi_unregister_gsi(gsi); + } + + return ret; +} + static int arm_pmu_acpi_parse_irqs(void) { int irq, cpu, irq_cpu, err; @@ -279,6 +346,8 @@ static int arm_pmu_acpi_init(void) if (acpi_disabled) return 0; + arm_spe_acpi_parse_irqs(); /* failures are expected */ + ret = arm_pmu_acpi_parse_irqs(); if (ret) return ret;
ACPI 6.3 adds additional fields to the MADT GICC structure to describe SPE PPI's. We pick these out of the cached reference to the madt_gicc structure similarly to the core PMU code. We then create a platform device referring to the IRQ and let the user/module loader decide whether to load the SPE driver. Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> --- arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h | 3 ++ drivers/perf/arm_pmu_acpi.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+)