Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] dmaengine: idxd: Add IDXD performance monitor support

[Vinod Koul]

On 20-04-21, 09:13, Zanussi, Tom wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
> 
> On 4/20/2021 6:11 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 03-04-21, 11:45, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> > 
> > > +config INTEL_IDXD_PERFMON
> > > +	bool "Intel Data Accelerators performance monitor support"
> > > +	depends on INTEL_IDXD
> > > +	default y
> > 
> > default y..?
> 
> Will change to n.

That is the default, you may drop this line

> 
> > 
> > >   /* IDXD software descriptor */
> > > @@ -369,4 +399,19 @@ int idxd_cdev_get_major(struct idxd_device *idxd);
> > >   int idxd_wq_add_cdev(struct idxd_wq *wq);
> > >   void idxd_wq_del_cdev(struct idxd_wq *wq);
> > > +/* perfmon */
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_IDXD_PERFMON
> > 
> > maybe use IS_ENABLED()

?

> > 
> > > @@ -556,6 +562,8 @@ static int __init idxd_init_module(void)
> > >   	for (i = 0; i < IDXD_TYPE_MAX; i++)
> > >   		idr_init(&idxd_idrs[i]);
> > > +	perfmon_init();
> > > +
> > >   	err = idxd_register_bus_type();
> > >   	if (err < 0)
> > >   		return err;
> > > @@ -589,5 +597,6 @@ static void __exit idxd_exit_module(void)
> > >   	pci_unregister_driver(&idxd_pci_driver);
> > >   	idxd_cdev_remove();
> > >   	idxd_unregister_bus_type();
> > > +	perfmon_exit();
> > 
> > Ideally would make sense to add perfmon module first and then add use in
> > idxd..
> > 
> 
> OK, I'll separate this out into a separate patch.
> 
> > > +static ssize_t cpumask_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> > > +			    char *buf);
> > > +
> > > +static cpumask_t		perfmon_dsa_cpu_mask;
> > > +static bool			cpuhp_set_up;
> > > +static enum cpuhp_state		cpuhp_slot;
> > > +
> > > +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(cpumask);
> > 
> > Pls document these new attributes added

?

> > 
> > > +static int perfmon_collect_events(struct idxd_pmu *idxd_pmu,
> > > +				  struct perf_event *leader,
> > > +				  bool dogrp)
> > 
> > dogrp..?
> > 
> 
> Yeah, bad name, first thought on seeing it is always 'dog'. ;-)

Yep, that was my first read as well... i guess it would be better as
do_grp
-- 
~Vinod