Hi Alexandru,
On 10/30/20 6:50 PM, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On 10/30/20 5:09 PM, Auger Eric wrote:
>> Hi Alexandru,
>>
>> On 10/30/20 4:59 PM, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
>> [..]
>>>>> + spe.align = 1 << spe.align;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + pmsidr = read_sysreg_s(SYS_PMSIDR_EL1);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + interval = (pmsidr >> SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_INTERVAL_SHIFT) & SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_INTERVAL_MASK;
>>>>> + spe.min_interval = spe_min_interval(interval);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + spe.max_record_size = (pmsidr >> SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_MAXSIZE_SHIFT) & \
>>>>> + SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_MAXSIZE_MASK;
>>>>> + spe.max_record_size = 1 << spe.max_record_size;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + spe.countsize = (pmsidr >> SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_COUNTSIZE_SHIFT) & \
>>>>> + SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_COUNTSIZE_MASK;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + spe.fl_cap = pmsidr & BIT(SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_FL_SHIFT);
>>>>> + spe.ft_cap = pmsidr & BIT(SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_FT_SHIFT);
>>>>> + spe.fe_cap = pmsidr & BIT(SYS_PMSIDR_EL1_FE_SHIFT);
>>>> Why did you remove the report_info() section? I think those human
>>>> readable info can be useful.
>>> I made them part of the test. Since the architecture says they are 1, I think
>>> making sure their value matches is more useful than printing something that the
>>> architecture guarantees.
>> OK for those caps which are always 1 anyway but I was more thinking about
>>
>> report_info("Align= %d bytes, Min Interval=%d Single record Max Size =
>> %d bytes", spe.align, spe.min_interval, spe.maxsize);
>>
>> I'd prefer to keep it.
>
> Oh, I think I see what you mean, I chose to print them using printf in main().
> This is very similar to what the timer test does, only it does it directly in
> main(), instead of calling another function (print_timer_info(), in the case of
> the timer test). I can move the printfs to spe_probe() if that's what you prefer.
Ah OK I did not notice. Whatever the place if those traces are there I
am fine.
Thanks
Eric
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex
>
