Hi Jeremy,
One comment below.
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@xxxxxxx> writes:
> From: Mark Salter <msalter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In preparation for ACPI support, add a pmu_probe_info table to
> the arm_pmu_device_probe() call. This table gets used when
> probing in the absence of a devicetree node for PMU.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Salter <msalter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@xxxxxxx>
> ---
[...]
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf/arm_pmu.h b/include/linux/perf/arm_pmu.h
> index e188438..65d8e27 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf/arm_pmu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf/arm_pmu.h
> @@ -147,6 +147,9 @@ struct pmu_probe_info {
> #define XSCALE_PMU_PROBE(_version, _fn) \
> PMU_PROBE(ARM_CPU_IMP_INTEL << 24 | _version, ARM_PMU_XSCALE_MASK, _fn)
>
> +#define ARMV8_PMU_PART_PROBE(_part, _fn) \
> + PMU_PROBE((_part) << MIDR_PARTNUM_SHIFT, MIDR_PARTNUM_MASK, _fn)
> +
This hunk could be dropped as it doesn't seem to be used in the
patchset.
With the above change -
FWIW,
Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@xxxxxxx>
> int arm_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
> const struct of_device_id *of_table,
> const struct pmu_probe_info *probe_table);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
