| Message ID | 20240918215846.1424282-3-bwicaksono@nvidia.com |
|---|---|
| State | Handled Elsewhere |
| Headers | show |
| Series | perf: arm_cspmu: nvidia: update event list and filter | expand |
On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 09:58:45PM +0000, Besar Wicaksono wrote: > Rename loc* and rem* events in CNVLINK PMU to cmem* and gmem* events. > > Signed-off-by: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> > --- > drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > index ea2d44adfa7c..d1cd9975e71a 100644 > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > @@ -112,6 +112,25 @@ static struct attribute *mcf_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > NULL, > }; > > +static struct attribute *mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_cmem, 0x0), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_gmem, 0x1), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_cmem, 0x2), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_gmem, 0x3), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_cmem, 0x4), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_gmem, 0x5), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_cmem, 0x6), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_gmem, 0x7), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_cmem, 0x8), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_gmem, 0x9), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_cmem, 0xa), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_gmem, 0xb), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_cmem, 0xc), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_gmem, 0xd), > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > + NULL, > +}; > + > static struct attribute *generic_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > NULL, > @@ -234,7 +253,7 @@ static const struct nv_cspmu_match nv_cspmu_match[] = { > .filter_default_val = NV_CNVL_FILTER_ID_MASK, > .name_pattern = "nvidia_cnvlink_pmu_%u", > .name_fmt = NAME_FMT_SOCKET, > - .event_attr = mcf_pmu_event_attrs, > + .event_attr = mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs, > .format_attr = cnvlink_pmu_format_attrs > }, Hmm. Isn't this a user-visible change? For example, will scripts driving 'perf' with the old event names continue to work after this patch? Will
> -----Original Message----- > From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 8:19 AM > To: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> > Cc: suzuki.poulose@arm.com; robin.murphy@arm.com; > catalin.marinas@arm.com; mark.rutland@arm.com; linux-arm- > kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > tegra@vger.kernel.org; Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>; Jon Hunter > <jonathanh@nvidia.com>; Vikram Sethi <vsethi@nvidia.com>; Rich Wiley > <rwiley@nvidia.com>; Bob Knight <rknight@nvidia.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf: arm_cspmu: nvidia: update CNVLINK PMU > events > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 09:58:45PM +0000, Besar Wicaksono wrote: > > Rename loc* and rem* events in CNVLINK PMU to cmem* and gmem* > events. > > > > Signed-off-by: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> > > --- > > drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > index ea2d44adfa7c..d1cd9975e71a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > @@ -112,6 +112,25 @@ static struct attribute *mcf_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > NULL, > > }; > > > > +static struct attribute *mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_cmem, 0x0), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_gmem, 0x1), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_cmem, 0x2), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_gmem, 0x3), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_cmem, 0x4), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_gmem, 0x5), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_cmem, 0x6), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_gmem, 0x7), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_cmem, 0x8), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_gmem, 0x9), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_cmem, 0xa), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_gmem, 0xb), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_cmem, 0xc), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_gmem, 0xd), > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, > ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > > + NULL, > > +}; > > + > > static struct attribute *generic_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, > ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > > NULL, > > @@ -234,7 +253,7 @@ static const struct nv_cspmu_match > nv_cspmu_match[] = { > > .filter_default_val = NV_CNVL_FILTER_ID_MASK, > > .name_pattern = "nvidia_cnvlink_pmu_%u", > > .name_fmt = NAME_FMT_SOCKET, > > - .event_attr = mcf_pmu_event_attrs, > > + .event_attr = mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs, > > .format_attr = cnvlink_pmu_format_attrs > > }, > > Hmm. Isn't this a user-visible change? For example, will scripts driving > 'perf' with the old event names continue to work after this patch? > Yes this is user visible. I am expecting user script to be updated accordingly. Would this be reasonable? Regards, Besar
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 05:21:06PM +0000, Besar Wicaksono wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 8:19 AM > > To: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> > > Cc: suzuki.poulose@arm.com; robin.murphy@arm.com; > > catalin.marinas@arm.com; mark.rutland@arm.com; linux-arm- > > kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > > tegra@vger.kernel.org; Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>; Jon Hunter > > <jonathanh@nvidia.com>; Vikram Sethi <vsethi@nvidia.com>; Rich Wiley > > <rwiley@nvidia.com>; Bob Knight <rknight@nvidia.com> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf: arm_cspmu: nvidia: update CNVLINK PMU > > events > > > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 09:58:45PM +0000, Besar Wicaksono wrote: > > > Rename loc* and rem* events in CNVLINK PMU to cmem* and gmem* > > events. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++++- > > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > index ea2d44adfa7c..d1cd9975e71a 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > @@ -112,6 +112,25 @@ static struct attribute *mcf_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > > NULL, > > > }; > > > > > > +static struct attribute *mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_cmem, 0x0), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_gmem, 0x1), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_cmem, 0x2), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_gmem, 0x3), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_cmem, 0x4), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_gmem, 0x5), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_cmem, 0x6), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_gmem, 0x7), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_cmem, 0x8), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_gmem, 0x9), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_cmem, 0xa), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_gmem, 0xb), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_cmem, 0xc), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_gmem, 0xd), > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, > > ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > > > + NULL, > > > +}; > > > + > > > static struct attribute *generic_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > > ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, > > ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > > > NULL, > > > @@ -234,7 +253,7 @@ static const struct nv_cspmu_match > > nv_cspmu_match[] = { > > > .filter_default_val = NV_CNVL_FILTER_ID_MASK, > > > .name_pattern = "nvidia_cnvlink_pmu_%u", > > > .name_fmt = NAME_FMT_SOCKET, > > > - .event_attr = mcf_pmu_event_attrs, > > > + .event_attr = mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs, > > > .format_attr = cnvlink_pmu_format_attrs > > > }, > > > > Hmm. Isn't this a user-visible change? For example, will scripts driving > > 'perf' with the old event names continue to work after this patch? > > > > Yes this is user visible. I am expecting user script to be updated accordingly. > Would this be reasonable? I don't think so, no. We don't tend to require userspace changes as a result of upgrading the kernel. Will
> -----Original Message----- > From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 11:27 AM > To: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> > Cc: suzuki.poulose@arm.com; robin.murphy@arm.com; > catalin.marinas@arm.com; mark.rutland@arm.com; linux-arm- > kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > tegra@vger.kernel.org; Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>; Jon Hunter > <jonathanh@nvidia.com>; Vikram Sethi <vsethi@nvidia.com>; Rich Wiley > <rwiley@nvidia.com>; Bob Knight <rknight@nvidia.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf: arm_cspmu: nvidia: update CNVLINK PMU > events > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 05:21:06PM +0000, Besar Wicaksono wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > > > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 8:19 AM > > > To: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> > > > Cc: suzuki.poulose@arm.com; robin.murphy@arm.com; > > > catalin.marinas@arm.com; mark.rutland@arm.com; linux-arm- > > > kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > > > tegra@vger.kernel.org; Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>; Jon Hunter > > > <jonathanh@nvidia.com>; Vikram Sethi <vsethi@nvidia.com>; Rich Wiley > > > <rwiley@nvidia.com>; Bob Knight <rknight@nvidia.com> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf: arm_cspmu: nvidia: update CNVLINK PMU > > > events > > > > > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 09:58:45PM +0000, Besar Wicaksono wrote: > > > > Rename loc* and rem* events in CNVLINK PMU to cmem* and gmem* > > > events. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c | 21 > ++++++++++++++++++++- > > > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > > index ea2d44adfa7c..d1cd9975e71a 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > > @@ -112,6 +112,25 @@ static struct attribute *mcf_pmu_event_attrs[] > = { > > > > NULL, > > > > }; > > > > > > > > +static struct attribute *mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_cmem, 0x0), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_gmem, 0x1), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_cmem, 0x2), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_gmem, 0x3), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_cmem, 0x4), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_gmem, 0x5), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_cmem, 0x6), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_gmem, 0x7), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_cmem, 0x8), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_gmem, 0x9), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_cmem, 0xa), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_gmem, 0xb), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_cmem, 0xc), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_gmem, 0xd), > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, > > > ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > > > > + NULL, > > > > +}; > > > > + > > > > static struct attribute *generic_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > > > ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, > > > ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > > > > NULL, > > > > @@ -234,7 +253,7 @@ static const struct nv_cspmu_match > > > nv_cspmu_match[] = { > > > > .filter_default_val = NV_CNVL_FILTER_ID_MASK, > > > > .name_pattern = "nvidia_cnvlink_pmu_%u", > > > > .name_fmt = NAME_FMT_SOCKET, > > > > - .event_attr = mcf_pmu_event_attrs, > > > > + .event_attr = mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs, > > > > .format_attr = cnvlink_pmu_format_attrs > > > > }, > > > > > > Hmm. Isn't this a user-visible change? For example, will scripts driving > > > 'perf' with the old event names continue to work after this patch? > > > > > > > Yes this is user visible. I am expecting user script to be updated accordingly. > > Would this be reasonable? > > I don't think so, no. We don't tend to require userspace changes as a > result of upgrading the kernel. Are you referring to userspace change just on the perf tool side? Cause this PMU doesn't have JSON scripts for alias/metric in the perf tool yet. Do you have suggestion of the proper approach? Thanks, Besar
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 02:10:55PM +0000, Besar Wicaksono wrote: > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > > b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > > > index ea2d44adfa7c..d1cd9975e71a 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c > > > > > @@ -112,6 +112,25 @@ static struct attribute *mcf_pmu_event_attrs[] > > = { > > > > > NULL, > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > +static struct attribute *mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_cmem, 0x0), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_gmem, 0x1), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_cmem, 0x2), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_gmem, 0x3), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_cmem, 0x4), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_gmem, 0x5), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_cmem, 0x6), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_gmem, 0x7), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_cmem, 0x8), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_gmem, 0x9), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_cmem, 0xa), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_gmem, 0xb), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_cmem, 0xc), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_gmem, 0xd), > > > > > + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, > > > > ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > > > > > + NULL, > > > > > +}; > > > > > + > > > > > static struct attribute *generic_pmu_event_attrs[] = { > > > > > ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, > > > > ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), > > > > > NULL, > > > > > @@ -234,7 +253,7 @@ static const struct nv_cspmu_match > > > > nv_cspmu_match[] = { > > > > > .filter_default_val = NV_CNVL_FILTER_ID_MASK, > > > > > .name_pattern = "nvidia_cnvlink_pmu_%u", > > > > > .name_fmt = NAME_FMT_SOCKET, > > > > > - .event_attr = mcf_pmu_event_attrs, > > > > > + .event_attr = mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs, > > > > > .format_attr = cnvlink_pmu_format_attrs > > > > > }, > > > > > > > > Hmm. Isn't this a user-visible change? For example, will scripts driving > > > > 'perf' with the old event names continue to work after this patch? > > > > > > > > > > Yes this is user visible. I am expecting user script to be updated accordingly. > > > Would this be reasonable? > > > > I don't think so, no. We don't tend to require userspace changes as a > > result of upgrading the kernel. > > Are you referring to userspace change just on the perf tool side? > Cause this PMU doesn't have JSON scripts for alias/metric in the perf tool yet. I'm not sure that matters, does it? If the mappings are exposed in sysfs, then the tool will pick them up. > Do you have suggestion of the proper approach? I'd say leave the event names like they are and if you want to add aliases, do that in userspace. Will
diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c index ea2d44adfa7c..d1cd9975e71a 100644 --- a/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c @@ -112,6 +112,25 @@ static struct attribute *mcf_pmu_event_attrs[] = { NULL, }; +static struct attribute *mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs[] = { + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_cmem, 0x0), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_bytes_gmem, 0x1), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_cmem, 0x2), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_bytes_gmem, 0x3), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_cmem, 0x4), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_bytes_gmem, 0x5), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_cmem, 0x6), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_req_gmem, 0x7), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_cmem, 0x8), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(wr_req_gmem, 0x9), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_cmem, 0xa), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(total_req_gmem, 0xb), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_cmem, 0xc), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(rd_cum_outs_gmem, 0xd), + ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), + NULL, +}; + static struct attribute *generic_pmu_event_attrs[] = { ARM_CSPMU_EVENT_ATTR(cycles, ARM_CSPMU_EVT_CYCLES_DEFAULT), NULL, @@ -234,7 +253,7 @@ static const struct nv_cspmu_match nv_cspmu_match[] = { .filter_default_val = NV_CNVL_FILTER_ID_MASK, .name_pattern = "nvidia_cnvlink_pmu_%u", .name_fmt = NAME_FMT_SOCKET, - .event_attr = mcf_pmu_event_attrs, + .event_attr = mcf_cnvlink_pmu_event_attrs, .format_attr = cnvlink_pmu_format_attrs }, {
Rename loc* and rem* events in CNVLINK PMU to cmem* and gmem* events. Signed-off-by: Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@nvidia.com> --- drivers/perf/arm_cspmu/nvidia_cspmu.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)