Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf: arm_spe: Enable ACPI/Platform automatic module loading

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On 4/16/19 8:50 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 12:24:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
On 4/4/19 12:04 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 05:39:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
Lets add the MODULE_TABLE and platform id_table entries so that
the SPE driver can attach to the ACPI platform device created by
the core pmu code.

Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@xxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx>
---
   drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 11 +++++++++--
   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
index 7cb766dafe85..ffa2c76c08bb 100644
--- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
+++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
@@ -1176,7 +1176,13 @@ static const struct of_device_id arm_spe_pmu_of_match[] = {
   };
   MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, arm_spe_pmu_of_match);
-static int arm_spe_pmu_device_dt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static const struct platform_device_id arm_spe_match[] = {
+	{ "arm,spe-v1", 0},

It would be nice if we could avoid duplicating this string from the ACPI
parsing code.

Ok sure, I just need to find a good common place for it.

There doesn't appear to be a good common place for this, so maybe arm_pmu.h, which can then be included in the spe driver is the right thing.




+	{ }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, arm_spe_match);
+
+static int arm_spe_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
   {
   	int ret;
   	struct arm_spe_pmu *spe_pmu;
@@ -1236,11 +1242,12 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_device_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
   }
   static struct platform_driver arm_spe_pmu_driver = {
+	.id_table = arm_spe_match,
   	.driver	= {
   		.name		= DRVNAME,
   		.of_match_table	= of_match_ptr(arm_spe_pmu_of_match),

Hmm, so some other drivers don't hook .id_table like you do, but instead
hook .acpi_match_table in the driver structure. Is that not better?

This isn't actually an ACPI device, (aka not defined in the namespace), so
its missing much of the ACPI functionality. I think that also means its
needs to be declared this way.

Looking at platform_match(), I'd really like to avoid having both an
.id_table and an .of_match_table field.



acpi_of_match_device() will actually use the .of_match_table, but it relies
on ACPI_COMPANION returning a valid acpi_device. If we don't have one of

Right, via the fwnode it can cause an acpi DSDT defined device with a _DSD "compatible" property to match an entry in the of_match_table compatible string. I don't think this is us...

those, perhaps we can use the .id_table exclusively and drop the
.of_match_table instead?

This definitely made me do my homework, the following is AFAIK:

Its possible to match on just a .id_table, but this requires matching the OF device name against the id_table name rather than against the OF compatible string (*). This doesn't seem like a good idea, despite platform_device_id entries being significantly smaller than the of_device_id ones. Plus, I think we end up with two duplicate tables because we still need the MODULE_TABLE(of,xxx) to assure that userspace can associate the modalias with the module.

OTOH, it seems possible to match on module name directly ('arm_spe_pmu'), but this limits us to only a single device type for all ACPI device variations unless we put platform checks in the module itself (ick!). I suspect in the future if a spe.v2 were to come out this would be a problem unless a separate module were created. Then there is the fact this still needs a platform_device_id table, as the modalias will read "platform:arm_spe_pmu". Which will cause people to question why its not just assigned and matched against the .id_table.


*(interestingly trivia: There doesn't appear to be a single arm64 module which matches on a MODULE_TABLE OF name. They only match type or compatible. Out of the 3534 modules on my machine only three do any OF table type matching, ipmi_si and two drivers for freescale networking fsl_pq_mdio and gianfar_driver. In those cases, i'm not even sure its actually necessary.)




[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux