| Message ID | 20220921140535.152627-2-james.clark@arm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64: defconfig: Add Coresight as module | expand |
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 03:05:35PM +0100, James Clark wrote: > +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI=m > +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI_INTEGRATION_REGS=y Do we want this turned on by default? According to the description it's a bit dangerous and it's exposed via sysfs rather than debugfs.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 04:26:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 03:05:35PM +0100, James Clark wrote: > > > +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI=m > > +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI_INTEGRATION_REGS=y > I agree - integration registers should not be enabled by default. > Do we want this turned on by default? According to the > description it's a bit dangerous and it's exposed via sysfs > rather than debugfs.
On 21/09/2022 17:46, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 04:26:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 03:05:35PM +0100, James Clark wrote: >> >>> +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI=m >>> +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI_INTEGRATION_REGS=y >> > > I agree - integration registers should not be enabled by default. > >> Do we want this turned on by default? According to the >> description it's a bit dangerous and it's exposed via sysfs >> rather than debugfs. > > Should I disable just CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI_INTEGRATION_REGS or CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI as well? There are other writable registers exposed via sysfs outside of these two options, so I wanted to check if it's just the integration registers that are the issue.
On 22/09/2022 10:04, James Clark wrote: > > > On 21/09/2022 17:46, Mathieu Poirier wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 04:26:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 03:05:35PM +0100, James Clark wrote: >>> >>>> +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI=m >>>> +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI_INTEGRATION_REGS=y >>> >> >> I agree - integration registers should not be enabled by default. >> >>> Do we want this turned on by default? According to the >>> description it's a bit dangerous and it's exposed via sysfs >>> rather than debugfs. >> >> > > Should I disable just CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI_INTEGRATION_REGS or > CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI as well? There are other writable registers exposed > via sysfs outside of these two options, so I wanted to check if it's > just the integration registers that are the issue. It is good/fine to keep CORESIGHT_CTI. But you may remove the INTEGRATION_REGS. They are there for "verification" of the CTI integration on the SoC. We added them only for the platform bring up purposes. Suzuki
diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig index ef3467092ded..c183914ab999 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig @@ -1340,4 +1340,13 @@ CONFIG_DEBUG_FS=y # CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG is not set # CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT is not set # CONFIG_FTRACE is not set +CONFIG_CORESIGHT=m +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_LINK_AND_SINK_TMC=m +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CATU=m +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_SINK_TPIU=m +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_SINK_ETBV10=m +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_STM=m +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CPU_DEBUG=m +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI=m +CONFIG_CORESIGHT_CTI_INTEGRATION_REGS=y CONFIG_MEMTEST=y
Add Coresight to defconfig so that build errors are caught. CONFIG_CORESIGHT_SOURCE_ETM4X is excluded because it depends on CONFIG_PID_IN_CONTEXTIDR which has a performance cost. Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com> --- arch/arm64/configs/defconfig | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)