Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:9afc:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id t28csp704468pxm; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:46:58 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx7q8h+2z8IibQEFpu/VhjtNVDl4Dgi0NICqB+7nKfDIPB7RfXh2nKR4kye1ecRfZLOztz0 X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8498:b0:150:d71c:39e0 with SMTP id c24-20020a170902849800b00150d71c39e0mr5257853plo.168.1645840017921; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:46:57 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1645840017; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=l0DkMkMltCP3C/JbOBZKgRiILVFRcoNSSfKmu1dKz5U82Rfb5YizYKG654DdDAH+8z ye8Vu72DfkTSVM++qNtqsyp5ERAcTAAk1rmkvAfwA452ev2oOBhLKYkodAGtzcV9WPsl LgJGGNmX90wMQ6ag5cEE4KIfLIuXYCRZhIOObRWCknhgiJyGabtlwdgRms3UJ2NTzHfH jnY2Bm1I5IULiMmzxUhc5LbcTYE9Qu7FwQYSI1hVJv1md7Qr/EmRzBz2b1UtB8ZImeZo JSIrep3Q4a/UW1YB+kA8xs/S/uk9l5SeXMcOdabeiGcTp3f3VDR46x/w6ox7V0IKpHEV j3OA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from :references:cc:to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id; bh=bjl/1gQmYk168Ra8VDlcdJMGfH37WASTVjMtwyX7OxQ=; b=d8UtvblBlS85jwb8yB20kVX+UKeVjIzCaz1VJoIJfSiovhqxDGriqbzBIAzwP3Mf9f A6dOcmaECOmYlVEOG1i1NtVXL8QlUj7KN+TbO4zBkvfeRH7E7+KWYG9WGUl2ZRFdRmMX R2/OFRYO8IDGhFHzJJNvm0/GHITR83uwplapuhbCliUOXGoz9A7/SNFEbGW0dxC1dvo7 Cw1jpBRzS4ZMdj0qk4x9b3h1Pb8qBORpk/nDsMQTdAsi6d7xrJcS3yiuXS1qYVS/kKKI ExOUscD3yldXkJtV/nMXLzktXCZzrc2DM4q/jWBD2czApSGJ+cL7ACrBBzh3liqn75zM JpvQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net. [23.128.96.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e14-20020a170903240e00b0014cb77b1229si3377673plo.171.2022.02.25.17.46.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:46:57 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B49272013E5; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 17:35:42 -0800 (PST) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242994AbiBYQ3i (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 25 Feb 2022 11:29:38 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53338 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235397AbiBYQ3g (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Feb 2022 11:29:36 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D94251405C0 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 08:29:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A36EED1; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 08:29:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.57.39.55] (unknown [10.57.39.55]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3556B3F70D; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 08:29:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 16:28:59 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/15] coresight: Make ETM4x TRCIDR0 register accesses consistent with sysreg.h Content-Language: en-US To: Mike Leach , Suzuki K Poulose Cc: Anshuman Khandual , mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, coresight@lists.linaro.org, leo.yan@linaro.com, Leo Yan , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20220203120604.128396-1-james.clark@arm.com> <20220203120604.128396-2-james.clark@arm.com> <1b649955-cb45-1283-68cd-c82582cef60c@arm.com> <7ba34443-d76a-253d-d112-4100d5a57e21@arm.com> From: James Clark In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/02/2022 09:32, Mike Leach wrote: > Hi James, > > When reviewing another patch set I spotted that there is a FIELD_GET > macro already defined for the kernel in include/linux/bitfield.h > > Advantage of this is that you only need to define a shifted mask for > each field and the macro handles the extraction and shifting > automatically. > It also ensures does a bunch of compile time sanity checks to ensure > that the masks are in range for the type. > > i.e. - define the mask _with_ the shift > #define TRCIDR0_INSTP0_MASK GENMASK(2, 1) > > then > drvdata->instrp0 = !!(FIELD_GET(TRCIDR0_INSTP0_MASK, etmidr0) == 0b11); > > which means all the shift #defines can be dropped > > Should we use this and drop the REG_VAL or whatever? To me it seems like this is a much better way of doing it because it removes one source of error with the shift being incorrect. This way it also mirrors the reference manual more closely. One possible issue is that it's not really consistent with sysreg.h because masks there are from the 0 bit and the shift is used. I suppose doing it this way is still closer to sysreg.h so it's a net benefit. I checked converting one register to this format and the compiler still emits the same thing so if we want to we can go ahead and do all of them. I'm leaning towards this way because this is what I would have done if it was from scratch. I just did it with the mask and the shift separately for consistency. > > Regards > > Mike > > On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 15:04, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >> >> On 07/02/2022 05:44, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>> Hi James, >>> >>> These are all ETM4X specific changes. Something like this might be cleaner >>> and also more compact. Also would suggest to follow the same for subsequent >>> patches as well. >>> >>> coresight: etm4x: Cleanup TRCIDR0 register accesses >>> >>> Consistency with sysreg.h could be mentioned in the commit message itself. >>> >>> On 2/3/22 5:35 PM, James Clark wrote: >>>> This is a no-op change for style and consistency and has no effect on the >>>> binary produced by gcc-11. >>> >>> This patch adds register definitions, helper macros as well. Please expand >>> the commit message to add more details. This is too short, for the change >>> it creates. BTW why is it necessary to mention GCC version number here. >>> >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: James Clark >>>> --- >>>> .../coresight/coresight-etm4x-core.c | 36 +++++-------------- >>>> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h | 17 +++++++++ >>>> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-priv.h | 5 +++ >>>> 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-core.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-core.c >>>> index e2eebd865241..107e81948f76 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-core.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-core.c >>>> @@ -1091,41 +1091,21 @@ static void etm4_init_arch_data(void *info) >>>> etmidr0 = etm4x_relaxed_read32(csa, TRCIDR0); >>>> >>>> /* INSTP0, bits[2:1] P0 tracing support field */ >>>> - if (BMVAL(etmidr0, 1, 2) == 0b11) >>>> - drvdata->instrp0 = true; >>>> - else >>>> - drvdata->instrp0 = false; >>>> - >>>> + drvdata->instrp0 = !!(REG_VAL(etmidr0, TRCIDR0_INSTP0) == 0b11); >>>> /* TRCBB, bit[5] Branch broadcast tracing support bit */ >>>> - if (BMVAL(etmidr0, 5, 5)) >>>> - drvdata->trcbb = true; >>>> - else >>>> - drvdata->trcbb = false; >>>> - >>>> + drvdata->trcbb = !!(etmidr0 & TRCIDR0_TRCBB); >>>> /* TRCCOND, bit[6] Conditional instruction tracing support bit */ >>>> - if (BMVAL(etmidr0, 6, 6)) >>>> - drvdata->trccond = true; >>>> - else >>>> - drvdata->trccond = false; >>>> - >>>> + drvdata->trccond = !!(etmidr0 & TRCIDR0_TRCCOND); >>>> /* TRCCCI, bit[7] Cycle counting instruction bit */ >>>> - if (BMVAL(etmidr0, 7, 7)) >>>> - drvdata->trccci = true; >>>> - else >>>> - drvdata->trccci = false; >>>> - >>>> + drvdata->trccci = !!(etmidr0 & TRCIDR0_TRCCCI); >>>> /* RETSTACK, bit[9] Return stack bit */ >>>> - if (BMVAL(etmidr0, 9, 9)) >>>> - drvdata->retstack = true; >>>> - else >>>> - drvdata->retstack = false; >>>> - >>>> + drvdata->retstack = !!(etmidr0 & TRCIDR0_RETSTACK); >>>> /* NUMEVENT, bits[11:10] Number of events field */ >>>> - drvdata->nr_event = BMVAL(etmidr0, 10, 11); >>>> + drvdata->nr_event = REG_VAL(etmidr0, TRCIDR0_NUMEVENT); >>>> /* QSUPP, bits[16:15] Q element support field */ >>>> - drvdata->q_support = BMVAL(etmidr0, 15, 16); >>>> + drvdata->q_support = REG_VAL(etmidr0, TRCIDR0_QSUPP); >>>> /* TSSIZE, bits[28:24] Global timestamp size field */ >>>> - drvdata->ts_size = BMVAL(etmidr0, 24, 28); >>>> + drvdata->ts_size = REG_VAL(etmidr0, TRCIDR0_TSSIZE); >>>> >>>> /* maximum size of resources */ >>>> etmidr2 = etm4x_relaxed_read32(csa, TRCIDR2); >>>> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h >>>> index 3c4d69b096ca..2bd8ad953b8e 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h >>>> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x.h >>>> @@ -130,6 +130,23 @@ >>>> >>>> #define TRCRSR_TA BIT(12) >>>> >>>> +/* >>>> + * Bit positions of registers that are defined above, in the sysreg.h style >>>> + * of _MASK, _SHIFT and BIT(). >>>> + */ >>> >>> ^^^ not really necessary. Instead the format requirement for below mentioned >>> CORESIGHT_REG_VAL() macro might be relevant and should be mentioned. >>> >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_INSTP0_SHIFT 1 >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_INSTP0_MASK GENMASK(1, 0) >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_TRCBB BIT(5) >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_TRCCOND BIT(6) >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_TRCCCI BIT(7) >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_RETSTACK BIT(9) >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_NUMEVENT_SHIFT 10 >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_NUMEVENT_MASK GENMASK(1, 0) >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_QSUPP_SHIFT 15 >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_QSUPP_MASK GENMASK(1, 0) >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_TSSIZE_SHIFT 24 >>>> +#define TRCIDR0_TSSIZE_MASK GENMASK(4, 0) >>>> + >>>> /* >>>> * System instructions to access ETM registers. >>>> * See ETMv4.4 spec ARM IHI0064F section 4.3.6 System instructions >>>> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-priv.h b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-priv.h >>>> index ff1dd2092ac5..1452c6038421 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-priv.h >>>> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-priv.h >>>> @@ -36,6 +36,11 @@ >>>> >>>> #define TIMEOUT_US 100 >>>> #define BMVAL(val, lsb, msb) ((val & GENMASK(msb, lsb)) >> lsb) >>>> +/* >>>> + * Extract a field from a register where field is #defined in the form >>>> + * __MASK and __SHIFT >>>> + */ >>> >>> Looking at the usage, is already embedded in . So >>> it requires _SHIFT and _MASK instead. Unless register >>> name should be passed as separate argument (which actually might be better). >>> >>> REG_VAL(etmidr0, TRCIDR0_TSSIZE) ----> REG_VAL(etmidr0, TRCIDR0, TSSIZE) >> >> I don't see much difference here. So I am fine either way. >> >>> >>> with some restructuring in the comment .. >>> >>> /* >>> * Extract a field from a coresight register >>> * >>> * Required fields are defined as macros like the following >>> * >>> * __MASK and __SHIFT >>> */ >>> >>>> +#define REG_VAL(val, field) ((val & (field##_MASK << field##_SHIFT)) >> field##_SHIFT) >>> >>> This is too generic to be in a coresight header or it should just be >>> named CORESIGHT_REG_VAL() instead, making it more specific for here. >>> >>> The build should fail in case any required macro definition is absent. >>> I guess no more fortification is required in case macros are missing. >>> >>> However CORESIGHT_REG_VAL() is better placed in >>> just before all the dependent SHIFT/MASK register field definition >>> starts. >> >> Not necessarily. CORESIGHT_REG_VAL() is a generic function and doesn't >> have anything specific to do with etm4x. We could reuse that for >> cleaning up other drivers in CoreSight. >> >> Cheers >> Suzuki > > >