Hi, On 2022/5/9 18:02, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > Cc: Mike Williams, Mathieu Poirier > > On 09/05/2022 10:28, Will Deacon wrote: >> On Sun, May 08, 2022 at 07:28:08PM -0500, Besar Wicaksono wrote: >>> Add driver support for ARM CoreSight PMU device and event attributes for NVIDIA >>> implementation. The code is based on ARM Coresight PMU architecture and ACPI ARM >>> Performance Monitoring Unit table (APMT) specification below: >>> * ARM Coresight PMU: >>> https://developer.arm.com/documentation/ihi0091/latest >>> * APMT: https://developer.arm.com/documentation/den0117/latest >>> >>> Notes: >>> * There is a concern on the naming of the PMU device. >>> Currently the driver is probing "arm-coresight-pmu" device, however the APMT >>> spec supports different kinds of CoreSight PMU based implementation. So it is >>> open for discussion if the name can stay or a "generic" name is required. >>> Please see the following thread: >>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2022-May/740485.html >>> >>> Besar Wicaksono (2): >>> perf: coresight_pmu: Add support for ARM CoreSight PMU driver >>> perf: coresight_pmu: Add support for NVIDIA SCF and MCF attribute >>> >>> arch/arm64/configs/defconfig | 1 + >>> drivers/perf/Kconfig | 2 + >>> drivers/perf/Makefile | 1 + >>> drivers/perf/coresight_pmu/Kconfig | 10 + >>> drivers/perf/coresight_pmu/Makefile | 7 + >>> .../perf/coresight_pmu/arm_coresight_pmu.c | 1317 +++++++++++++++++ >>> .../perf/coresight_pmu/arm_coresight_pmu.h | 147 ++ >>> .../coresight_pmu/arm_coresight_pmu_nvidia.c | 300 ++++ >>> .../coresight_pmu/arm_coresight_pmu_nvidia.h | 17 + >>> 9 files changed, 1802 insertions(+) >> >> How does this interact with all the stuff we have under >> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/? > > Absolutely zero, except for the name. The standard > is named "CoreSight PMU" which is a bit unfortunate, > given the only link, AFAIU, with the "CoreSight" architecture > is the Lock Access Register(LAR). For reference, the > drivers/hwtracing/coresight/ is purely "CoreSight" self-hosted > tracing and the PMU is called "cs_etm" (expands to coresight etm). > Otherwise the standard doesn't have anything to do with what > exists already in the kernel. > > That said, I am concerned that the "coresight_pmu" is easily confused > with what exists today. Given that this is more of a "PMU" standard > for the IPs in the Arm world, it would be better to name it as such > avoiding any confusion with the existing PMUs. > > One potential recommendation for the name is, "Arm PMU" (The ACPI table is named Arm PMU Table). > But then that could be clashing with the armv8_pmu :-(. > > Some of the other options are : > > "Arm Generic PMU" > "Arm Uncore PMU" To be honest, if wants to distinguish from Arm core PMU, the "Uncore PMU" is a better choice just in my opinion. The x86 including Intel and AMD also do the uncore PMU driver and with "uncore_" prefix. Thanks, Shaokun > "Arm PMU" > > Suzuki > >> >> Will > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > .
