qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 4/9] arm: pmu: Check Required Event Support


From: Auger Eric
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 4/9] arm: pmu: Check Required Event Support
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 19:32:00 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0

Hi Peter,

On 2/11/20 5:28 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 11:25, Eric Auger <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> If event counters are implemented check the common events
>> required by the PMUv3 are implemented.
>>
>> Some are unconditionally required (SW_INCR, CPU_CYCLES,
>> either INST_RETIRED or INST_SPEC). Some others only are
>> required if the implementation implements some other features.
>>
>> Check those wich are unconditionally required.
>>
>> This test currently fails on TCG as neither INST_RETIRED
>> or INST_SPEC are supported.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <address@hidden>
>>
> 
>> +static bool is_event_supported(uint32_t n, bool warn)
>> +{
>> +       uint64_t pmceid0 = read_sysreg(pmceid0_el0);
>> +       uint64_t pmceid1 = read_sysreg_s(PMCEID1_EL0);
>> +       bool supported;
>> +       uint64_t reg;
>> +
>> +       /*
>> +        * The low 32-bits of PMCEID0/1 respectly describe
>> +        * event support for events 0-31/32-63. Their High
>> +        * 32-bits describe support for extended events
>> +        * starting at 0x4000, using the same split.
>> +        */
>> +       if (n >= 0x0  && n <= 0x3F)
>> +               reg = (pmceid0 & 0xFFFFFFFF) | ((pmceid1 & 0xFFFFFFFF) << 
>> 32);
>> +       else if  (n >= 0x4000 && n <= 0x403F)
>> +               reg = (pmceid0 >> 32) | ((pmceid1 >> 32) << 32);
>> +       else
>> +               abort();
>> +
>> +       supported =  reg & (1UL << (n & 0x3F));
>> +
>> +       if (!supported && warn)
>> +               report_info("event %d is not supported", n);
> 
> As with satisfy_prerequisites(), printing this with "0x%x"
> would probably be more helpful to most users.
OK

Thanks

Eric
> 
> thanks
> -- PMM
> 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]