Re: [PATCHv3 3/5] arm-cci: Add routines to enable/disable all counters

[Suzuki K. Poulose]

On 10/12/15 15:32, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:03:25PM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:


> > +static void __maybe_unused
> > +pmu_disable_counters(struct cci_pmu *cci_pmu, unsigned long *mask)
> > +{
> > +	int i;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < cci_pmu->num_cntrs; i++) {
> > +		if (pmu_counter_is_enabled(cci_pmu, i)) {
> > +			set_bit(i, mask);
> > +			pmu_disable_counter(cci_pmu, i);
> > +		} else
> > +			clear_bit(i, mask);
>
> Can we not assume a clean mask to begin with?

If we force the caller to pass a clean mask, yes we could. I am fine
with either approach.

> > +	}
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Restore the status of the counters. Reversal of the pmu_disable_counters().
> > + * For each counter set in the mask, enable the counter back.
> > + */
> > +static void __maybe_unused
> > +pmu_restore_counters(struct cci_pmu *cci_pmu, unsigned long *mask)
>
> This would probably be better with s/restore/enable/ for consistency
> with pmu_disable_counters.

I had thought as well, but then chose restore as we don't enable all the
counters. Given that we pass a mask argument, it is fine to change it to
enable and will do that in the next one.

> Other than that this looks fine to me.

Thanks for the review.

Cheers
Suzuki

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/