On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 11:54:46AM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
Adds helper routines to disable the counter controls for
all the counters on the CCI PMU and restore it back, by
preserving the original state in caller provided mask.
Cc: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Suzuki K. Poulose <suzuki.poulose@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/bus/arm-cci.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
index a3938ef..2f1fcf0 100644
--- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
+++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
@@ -672,6 +672,44 @@ static void pmu_set_event(struct cci_pmu *cci_pmu, int idx, unsigned long event)
}
/*
+ * For all counters on the CCI-PMU, disable any 'enabled' counters,
+ * saving the changed counters in the mask, so that we can restore
+ * it later using pmu_restore_counters. The mask is private to the
+ * caller. We cannot rely on the used_mask maintained by the CCI_PMU
+ * as it only tells us if the counter is assigned to perf_event or not.
+ * The state of the perf_event cannot be locked by the PMU layer, hence
+ * we check the individual counter status (which can be locked by
+ * cci_pm->hw_events->pmu_lock).
+ *
+ * @mask should be initialised by the caller.
We should probably state "initialised to zero", or "empty".
+/*
+ * Restore the status of the counters. Reversal of the pmu_disable_counters().
+ * For each counter set in the mask, enable the counter back.
+ */
Shouldn't that say pmu_save_counters?
With that:
Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>