From 12a94953c37e834c3eabb839ce057094946fe67a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin Murphy Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 16:39:54 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] perf/arm-cmn: Support CMN-600AE The functional safety features of CMN-600AE have little to no impact on the PMU relative to the base CMN-600 design, so for simplicity we can reasonably just treat it as the same thing. The only obvious difference is that the revision numbers aren't aligned, so we may hide some aliases for events which do actually exist, but those can still be specified via the underlying "type,eventid" format so it's not too big a deal. Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy Reviewed-by: Ilkka Koskinen Tested-by: Michal Simek Signed-off-by: Will Deacon --- drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c index 23245352a3fc0..651edd73bfcb1 100644 --- a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c @@ -210,6 +210,7 @@ enum cmn_model { enum cmn_part { PART_CMN600 = 0x434, PART_CMN650 = 0x436, + PART_CMN600AE = 0x438, PART_CMN700 = 0x43c, PART_CI700 = 0x43a, PART_CMN_S3 = 0x43e, @@ -2266,6 +2267,9 @@ static int arm_cmn_discover(struct arm_cmn *cmn, unsigned int rgn_offset) reg = readq_relaxed(cfg_region + CMN_CFGM_PERIPH_ID_01); part = FIELD_GET(CMN_CFGM_PID0_PART_0, reg); part |= FIELD_GET(CMN_CFGM_PID1_PART_1, reg) << 8; + /* 600AE is close enough that it's not really worth more complexity */ + if (part == PART_CMN600AE) + part = PART_CMN600; if (cmn->part && cmn->part != part) dev_warn(cmn->dev, "Firmware binding mismatch: expected part number 0x%x, found 0x%x\n", -- 2.47.3