On 19 October 2015 at 09:37, Alexander Shishkin
<alexander.shishkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> +static int etm_event_pmu_start(struct perf_event *event)
>> +{
>> + int cpu, ret;
>> + cpumask_t mask;
>> + struct coresight_device *csdev;
>> +
>> + cpumask_clear(&mask);
>> + if (event->cpu != -1)
>> + cpumask_set_cpu(event->cpu, &mask);
>> + else
>> + cpumask_copy(&mask, cpu_online_mask);
>> +
>> + for_each_cpu(cpu, &mask) {
>> + csdev = per_cpu(csdev_src, cpu);
>> +
>> + if (!source_ops(csdev)->perf_start)
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + ret = source_ops(csdev)->perf_start(csdev);
>> + if (ret)
>> + goto err;
>
> So long as "perf_start" and "perf_stop" here mean
> "pm_runtime_get()/put()", this can work, but in that case maybe a better
> name should be used, because no real starting or stopping of anything
> takes place here.
You're correct, nothing else than pm_runtime operations should be
happening in there. I will revise the naming convention.
> Since pmu::event_init and event::destroy happen in
> allocation/deallocation paths and at event scheduling, it's not a good
> idea to actually start anything here.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
