Hi Lukas,
I was going to try testing this out, but it doesn't look functional. See
below.
On 16/05/2025 16:49, Lukas Zapolskas wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_perf.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_perf.c
> index 9365ce9fed04..15fa533731f3 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_perf.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_perf.c
> @@ -2,13 +2,177 @@
> /* Copyright 2023 Collabora Ltd */
> /* Copyright 2025 Arm ltd. */
>
> -#include <linux/bitops.h>
> +#include <drm/drm_gem.h>
> #include <drm/panthor_drm.h>
> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
> +#include <linux/circ_buf.h>
>
> #include "panthor_device.h"
> #include "panthor_fw.h"
> #include "panthor_perf.h"
>
> +/**
> + * PANTHOR_PERF_EM_BITS - Number of bits in a user-facing enable mask. This
> must correspond
> + * to the maximum number of counters available for
> selection on the newest
> + * Mali GPUs (128 as of the Mali-Gx15).
> + */
> +#define PANTHOR_PERF_EM_BITS (BITS_PER_TYPE(u64) * 2)
> +
> +enum panthor_perf_session_state {
> + /** @PANTHOR_PERF_SESSION_ACTIVE: The session is active and can be used
> for sampling. */
> + PANTHOR_PERF_SESSION_ACTIVE = 0,
> +
> + /**
> + * @PANTHOR_PERF_SESSION_OVERFLOW: The session encountered an overflow
> in one of the
> + * counters during the last sampling
> period. This flag
> + * gets propagated as part of samples
> emitted for this
> + * session, to ensure the userspace
> client can gracefully
> + * handle this data corruption.
> + */
> + PANTHOR_PERF_SESSION_OVERFLOW,
> +
> + /* Must be last */
> + PANTHOR_PERF_SESSION_MAX,
> +};
> +
> +struct panthor_perf_enable_masks {
> + /**
> + * @mask: Array of bitmasks indicating the counters userspace
> requested, where
> + * one bit represents a single counter. Used to build the
> firmware configuration
> + * and ensure that userspace clients obtain only the counters
> they requested.
> + */
> + unsigned long
> mask[DRM_PANTHOR_PERF_BLOCK_MAX][BITS_TO_LONGS(PANTHOR_PERF_EM_BITS)];
> +};
> +
> +struct panthor_perf_counter_block {
> + struct drm_panthor_perf_block_header header;
> + u64 counters[];
> +};
I think something has gone rather wrong in a rebasing. This struct was
already added in patch 2. So this causes a build error (that the kernel
test robot caught too).
[...]
> @@ -72,6 +236,122 @@ static void panthor_perf_info_init(struct panthor_device
> *ptdev)
> perf_info->sample_size = session_get_user_sample_size(perf_info);
> }
>
> +static struct panthor_perf_enable_masks *panthor_perf_create_em(struct
> drm_panthor_perf_cmd_setup
> + *setup_args)
There's some code style mis-formatting like this - which is then fixed
up in patch 5. So it looks like you've applied fixups to the wrong commit.
Also this series will need rebasing because there's some upstream
changes that it's now conflicting with. The base commit looks pretty
ancient now.
Thanks,
Steve
