Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] arm-cci: Add routines to enable/disable all counters

[Suzuki K. Poulose]

On 05/11/15 17:27, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > Can we not get rid of the mask entirely? The combination of used_mask
> > > and each event's hwc->state tells us which counters are actually in use.
> >
> > The problem is that neither hwc->state nor the cci_pmu->hw_events->events is
> > protected by pmu_lock, while enable/disable counter is. So we cannot really
> > rely on ((struct perf_event *)(cci_pmu->hw_events->events[counter]))->hw->state.
>
> They must be protected somehow, or we'd have races against cross-calls
> and/or the interrupt handler.

> Are we protected due to being cpu-affine with interrupts disabled when
> modifying these, is there some other mechanism that protects us, or do
> we have additional problems here?


Each perf_event is allocated a counter id atomically using the bit mask. So,
once the id is allocated nobody messes with that id from the PMU side. And,
the hw->state may have its own protection within the generic perf layer(which
I haven't checked).

Thanks
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/