powerpc/perf: Only define power_pmu_wants_prompt_pmi() for CONFIG_PPC64

power_pmu_wants_prompt_pmi() is used to decide if PMIs should be taken
promptly. This is valid only for ppc64 and is used only if
CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64=y. Hence include the function under config check
for PPC64.

Fixes warning for 32-bit compilation:

  arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c:2455:6: warning: no previous prototype for 'power_pmu_wants_prompt_pmi'
    2455 | bool power_pmu_wants_prompt_pmi(void)
         |      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fixes: 5a7745b96f43 ("powerpc/64s/perf: add power_pmu_wants_prompt_pmi to say whether perf wants PMIs to be soft-NMI")
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
[mpe: Move inside existing CONFIG_PPC64 ifdef block]
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220114031355.87480-1-atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com

1 files changed, 28 insertions, 30 deletions

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c
index a684901b6965..32b98b7a1f86 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c
@@ -776,6 +776,34 @@ static void pmao_restore_workaround(bool ebb)
 	mtspr(SPRN_PMC6, pmcs[5]);
 }
 
+/*
+ * If the perf subsystem wants performance monitor interrupts as soon as
+ * possible (e.g., to sample the instruction address and stack chain),
+ * this should return true. The IRQ masking code can then enable MSR[EE]
+ * in some places (e.g., interrupt handlers) that allows PMI interrupts
+ * through to improve accuracy of profiles, at the cost of some performance.
+ *
+ * The PMU counters can be enabled by other means (e.g., sysfs raw SPR
+ * access), but in that case there is no need for prompt PMI handling.
+ *
+ * This currently returns true if any perf counter is being used. It
+ * could possibly return false if only events are being counted rather than
+ * samples being taken, but for now this is good enough.
+ */
+bool power_pmu_wants_prompt_pmi(void)
+{
+	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuhw;
+
+	/*
+	 * This could simply test local_paca->pmcregs_in_use if that were not
+	 * under ifdef KVM.
+	 */
+	if (!ppmu)
+		return false;
+
+	cpuhw = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
+	return cpuhw->n_events;
+}
 #endif /* CONFIG_PPC64 */
 
 static void perf_event_interrupt(struct pt_regs *regs);
@@ -2438,36 +2466,6 @@ static void perf_event_interrupt(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	perf_sample_event_took(sched_clock() - start_clock);
 }
 
-/*
- * If the perf subsystem wants performance monitor interrupts as soon as
- * possible (e.g., to sample the instruction address and stack chain),
- * this should return true. The IRQ masking code can then enable MSR[EE]
- * in some places (e.g., interrupt handlers) that allows PMI interrupts
- * though to improve accuracy of profiles, at the cost of some performance.
- *
- * The PMU counters can be enabled by other means (e.g., sysfs raw SPR
- * access), but in that case there is no need for prompt PMI handling.
- *
- * This currently returns true if any perf counter is being used. It
- * could possibly return false if only events are being counted rather than
- * samples being taken, but for now this is good enough.
- */
-bool power_pmu_wants_prompt_pmi(void)
-{
-	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuhw;
-
-	/*
-	 * This could simply test local_paca->pmcregs_in_use if that were not
-	 * under ifdef KVM.
-	 */
-
-	if (!ppmu)
-		return false;
-
-	cpuhw = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
-	return cpuhw->n_events;
-}
-
 static int power_pmu_prepare_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
 {
 	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuhw = &per_cpu(cpu_hw_events, cpu);