All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
To: Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>
Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, he.chen@linux.intel.com,
	andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, dario.faggioli@citrix.com,
	ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, mengxu@cis.upenn.edu,
	jbeulich@suse.com, chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v5 04/24] x86: refactor psr: implement CPU init and free flow.
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 21:44:00 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170131024400.GA9186@char.us.ORACLE.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1484805686-7249-5-git-send-email-yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 02:01:06PM +0800, Yi Sun wrote:
> This patch implements the CPU init and free flow including L3 CAT
> initialization and feature list free.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> v5:
>     - modify commit message beacuse of code changes.
>     - add 'struct cpuid_leaf_regs' to save cpu registers value to reduce
>       parameters of init_feature function.
>     - modify comments to make them accurate.
>     - modify variables names to make them better, e.g. 'feat_tmp' to 'feat'.
>     - use 'list_for_each_entry_safe' when free features.
>     - do not delete 'feat_l3_cat' to make it can be reused when cpu online.
>     - use 'current_cpu_data'.
>     - clear 'X86_FEATURE_PQE' if cpuid_level is not right.
>     - Print socket info when 'opt_cpu_info' is true.
>     - remove 'cpu_prepare_work' function and move contents of it into
>       'psr_cpu_prepare'.
> ---
>  xen/arch/x86/psr.c | 176 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 174 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/psr.c b/xen/arch/x86/psr.c
> index f7ff3fc..e9dc07a 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/psr.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/psr.c
> @@ -35,6 +35,9 @@
>  #define PSR_CAT        (1<<1)
>  #define PSR_CDP        (1<<2)
>  
> +#define CAT_CBM_LEN_MASK 0x1f
> +#define CAT_COS_MAX_MASK 0xffff
> +
>  /*
>   * Per SDM chapter 'Cache Allocation Technology: Cache Mask Configuration',
>   * the MSRs range from 0C90H through 0D0FH (inclusive), enables support for
> @@ -127,6 +130,13 @@ struct feat_node {
>      struct list_head list;
>  };
>  
> +struct cpuid_leaf_regs {
> +    unsigned int eax;
> +    unsigned int ebx;
> +    unsigned int ecx;
> +    unsigned int edx;
> +};

Could you use 'struct cpuid_leaf' in x86_emulate.h ?

It would only require "#include <asm/x86_emulate.h>" I believe.

> +
>  struct psr_assoc {
>      uint64_t val;
>      uint64_t cos_mask;
> @@ -134,11 +144,76 @@ struct psr_assoc {
>  
>  struct psr_cmt *__read_mostly psr_cmt;
>  
> +static struct psr_socket_info *__read_mostly socket_info;
> +
>  static unsigned int opt_psr;
>  static unsigned int __initdata opt_rmid_max = 255;
> +static unsigned int __read_mostly opt_cos_max = MAX_COS_REG_CNT;
>  static uint64_t rmid_mask;
>  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct psr_assoc, psr_assoc);
>  
> +/*
> + * Declare global feature list entry for every feature to facilitate the
> + * feature list creation. It will be allocated in psr_cpu_prepare() and
> + * inserted into feature list in cpu_init_work().

You may also want to say it is protected by the cpu_add_remove_lock
spinlock.

> + */
> +static struct feat_node *feat_l3_cat;
> +
> +/* Common functions. */
> +static void free_feature(struct psr_socket_info *info)
> +{
> +    struct feat_node *feat, *next;
> +
> +    if ( !info )
> +        return;
> +
> +    list_for_each_entry_safe(feat, next, &info->feat_list, list)
> +    {
> +        clear_bit(feat->feature, &info->feat_mask);

Would it make sense to use __clear_bit?

As in you have already a lock (cpu_add_remove_lock) so nobody
can change the feat_mask. Hence thinking there is no need for the
lock operation?

> +        list_del(&feat->list);
> +        xfree(feat);
> +    }
> +}
> +
> +/* L3 CAT functions implementation. */
> +static void l3_cat_init_feature(struct cpuid_leaf_regs regs,
> +                                struct feat_node *feat,
> +                                struct psr_socket_info *info)
> +{
> +    struct psr_cat_hw_info l3_cat;
> +    unsigned int socket;
> +
> +    /* No valid value so do not enable feature. */
> +    if ( !regs.eax || !regs.edx )
> +        return;
> +
> +    l3_cat.cbm_len = (regs.eax & CAT_CBM_LEN_MASK) + 1;
> +    l3_cat.cos_max = min(opt_cos_max, regs.edx & CAT_COS_MAX_MASK);
> +
> +    /* cos=0 is reserved as default cbm(all bits within cbm_len are 1). */
> +    feat->cos_reg_val[0] = (1ull << l3_cat.cbm_len) - 1;
> +
> +    feat->feature = PSR_SOCKET_L3_CAT;
> +    __set_bit(PSR_SOCKET_L3_CAT, &info->feat_mask);

Aha! So you do reuse the enum! In which case you really
want to make sure you mention that in 'struct psr_socket_info'
the 'feat_mask' is actually the bit values of enum psr_feat_type.

Also do you want to add an ASSERT before you call the __set_bit:

ASSERT ( !test_bit(PSR_SOCKET_L3_CAT, &info->feat_mask) );

?
> +
> +    feat->info.l3_cat_info = l3_cat;
> +
> +    info->nr_feat++;
> +
> +    /* Add this feature into list. */
> +    list_add_tail(&feat->list, &info->feat_list);
> +
> +    socket = cpu_to_socket(smp_processor_id());
> +    if ( opt_cpu_info )
> +        printk(XENLOG_INFO
> +           "L3 CAT: enabled on socket %u, cos_max:%u, cbm_len:%u\n",

Odd spacing. I would think that the "L3 CAT: .. "
would be on the same column as XENLOG_INFO ?

Or you could flip this logic (if you are worried about the silly
80 characters requirement) around and do:

if ( !opt_cpu_info )
	return

And then do the printk on its own line?
> +           socket, feat->info.l3_cat_info.cos_max,
> +           feat->info.l3_cat_info.cbm_len);
> +}
> +
> +static const struct feat_ops l3_cat_ops = {
> +};
> +
>  static void __init parse_psr_bool(char *s, char *value, char *feature,
>                                    unsigned int mask)
>  {
> @@ -178,6 +253,9 @@ static void __init parse_psr_param(char *s)
>          if ( val_str && !strcmp(s, "rmid_max") )
>              opt_rmid_max = simple_strtoul(val_str, NULL, 0);
>  
> +        if ( val_str && !strcmp(s, "cos_max") )
> +            opt_cos_max = simple_strtoul(val_str, NULL, 0);
> +
>          s = ss + 1;
>      } while ( ss );
>  }
> @@ -333,18 +411,108 @@ void psr_domain_free(struct domain *d)
>      psr_free_rmid(d);
>  }
>  
> +static void cpu_init_work(void)
> +{
> +    struct psr_socket_info *info;
> +    unsigned int socket;
> +    unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> +    struct feat_node *feat;
> +    struct cpuid_leaf_regs regs;

Could you use the x86_emulate.h one?

Would it also make sense to make sure that you initialize
to default values:

	struct cpuid_leaf regs = { .a = 0, .b = 0, .c = 0, .d = 0 };
> +
> +    if ( !cpu_has(&current_cpu_data, X86_FEATURE_PQE) )
> +        return;
> +    else if ( current_cpu_data.cpuid_level < PSR_CPUID_LEVEL_CAT )
> +    {
> +        clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_PQE, current_cpu_data.x86_capability);
> +        return;
> +    }
> +
> +    socket = cpu_to_socket(cpu);
> +    info = socket_info + socket;
> +    if ( info->feat_mask )
> +        return;
> +
> +    INIT_LIST_HEAD(&info->feat_list);
> +    spin_lock_init(&info->ref_lock);
> +
> +    cpuid_count(PSR_CPUID_LEVEL_CAT, 0,
> +                &regs.eax, &regs.ebx, &regs.ecx, &regs.edx);
> +    if ( regs.ebx & PSR_RESOURCE_TYPE_L3 )
> +    {
> +        cpuid_count(PSR_CPUID_LEVEL_CAT, 1,
> +                    &regs.eax, &regs.ebx, &regs.ecx, &regs.edx);
> +
> +        feat = feat_l3_cat;
> +        feat_l3_cat = NULL;

.. so how does this work when this is initialized on a third
socket? Won't feat_l3_cat at that point be NULL leading to this
one below becoming a NULL pointer?

Ah wait. psr_cpu_prepare will allocate it.

Hm, could you add a comment about this?

/* psr_cpu_prepare will allocate it on subsequent CPU onlining. */

> +        feat->ops = l3_cat_ops;
> +
> +        l3_cat_init_feature(regs, feat, info);
> +    }
> +}
> +
> +static void cpu_fini_work(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +    unsigned int socket = cpu_to_socket(cpu);
> +
> +    if ( !socket_cpumask[socket] || cpumask_empty(socket_cpumask[socket]) )
> +    {
> +        free_feature(socket_info + socket);
> +    }
> +}
> +
> +static void __init init_psr(void)
> +{
> +    if ( opt_cos_max < 1 )
> +    {
> +        printk(XENLOG_INFO "CAT: disabled, cos_max is too small\n");
> +        return;
> +    }
> +
> +    socket_info = xzalloc_array(struct psr_socket_info, nr_sockets);
> +
> +    if ( !socket_info )
> +    {
> +        printk(XENLOG_INFO "Fail to alloc socket_info!\n");

Failed
> +        return;
> +    }
> +}
> +
> +static void __init psr_free(void)
> +{
> +    unsigned int i;
> +
> +    for ( i = 0; i < nr_sockets; i++ )
> +        free_feature(&socket_info[i]);
> +
> +    xfree(socket_info);
> +    socket_info = NULL;
> +}
> +
>  static int psr_cpu_prepare(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
> +    if ( !socket_info )
> +        return 0;
> +
> +    /* Malloc memory for the global feature head here. */
> +    if ( feat_l3_cat == NULL &&
> +         (feat_l3_cat = xzalloc(struct feat_node)) == NULL )

/me scratches his head.

Lets say we have a two socket machine. Each socket has
two CPUs (so total of 4 CPUs).

On CPU0  (in psr_presmp_init) it allocates feat_l3_cat. Then
later in (in psr_presmp_init) you call psr_cpu_init which
sets feat_l3_cat to NULL (and 'feat' is feat_l3_cat).

When CPU1 starts up then, psr_cpu_prepare is called
which means we allocate a new feat_l3_cat. 'cpu_init_work'
short-circuits (as info->feat_mask has a value) and does not
do anything.

When CPU2 (socket two), starts up then feat_l3_cat (as 'feat')
is used (in psr_cpu_init and again sets feat_l3_cat to NULL).

The last CPU3 (socket #2) starts up, and since feat_l3_cat is
NULL - it is allocated. But in 'cpu_init_work' it short-circuits
so we don't use third allocated 'feat_l3_cat' .

And we have an 'feat_l3_cat' that is not used for anything..

In other words - a memory leak. Granted a very small one.


> +        return -ENOMEM;
> +
>      return 0;
>  }
>  
>  static void psr_cpu_init(void)
>  {
> +    if ( socket_info )
> +        cpu_init_work();
> +
>      psr_assoc_init();
>  }
>  
>  static void psr_cpu_fini(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
> +    if ( socket_info )
> +        cpu_fini_work(cpu);
>      return;
>  }
>  
> @@ -386,10 +554,14 @@ static int __init psr_presmp_init(void)
>      if ( (opt_psr & PSR_CMT) && opt_rmid_max )
>          init_psr_cmt(opt_rmid_max);
>  
> -    psr_cpu_prepare(0);
> +    if ( opt_psr & PSR_CAT )
> +        init_psr();
> +
> +    if ( psr_cpu_prepare(0) )
> +        psr_free();
>  
>      psr_cpu_init();
> -    if ( psr_cmt_enabled() )
> +    if ( psr_cmt_enabled() || socket_info )
>          register_cpu_notifier(&cpu_nfb);
>  
>      return 0;
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-31  2:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-19  6:01 [PATCH RESEND v5 00/24] Enable L2 Cache Allocation Technology & Refactor psr.c Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 01/24] docs: create L2 Cache Allocation Technology (CAT) feature document Yi Sun
2017-01-20  9:39   ` Tian, Kevin
2017-01-22  2:15     ` Yi Sun
2017-02-08  6:45       ` Tian, Kevin
2017-01-30 18:10   ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-30 20:39     ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-02-04  7:24       ` Yi Sun
2017-02-04  7:06     ` Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 02/24] x86: refactor psr: remove L3 CAT/CDP codes Yi Sun
2017-01-30 22:05   ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 03/24] x86: refactor psr: implement main data structures Yi Sun
2017-01-30 22:20   ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-31 10:10     ` Jan Beulich
2017-01-31 14:12       ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-31 15:07         ` Jan Beulich
2017-01-31 17:32           ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-02-05  1:53     ` Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 04/24] x86: refactor psr: implement CPU init and free flow Yi Sun
2017-01-31  2:44   ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [this message]
2017-01-31 10:14     ` Jan Beulich
2017-01-31 14:13       ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-31 10:53     ` Andrew Cooper
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 05/24] x86: refactor psr: implement Domain init/free and schedule flows Yi Sun
2017-01-31 19:52   ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 06/24] x86: refactor psr: implement get hw info flow Yi Sun
2017-01-31 20:17   ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 07/24] x86: refactor psr: implement get value flow Yi Sun
2017-01-31 20:29   ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-02-07  2:47     ` Yi Sun
2017-02-07 13:56       ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 08/24] x86: refactor psr: set value: implement framework Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 09/24] x86: refactor psr: set value: assemble features value array Yi Sun
2017-01-31 20:57   ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-02-07  2:51     ` Yi Sun
2017-02-07 13:57       ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 10/24] x86: refactor psr: set value: implement cos finding flow Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 11/24] x86: refactor psr: set value: implement cos id picking flow Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 12/24] x86: refactor psr: set value: implement write msr flow Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 13/24] x86: refactor psr: implement CPU init and free flow for CDP Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 14/24] x86: refactor psr: implement get hw info " Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 15/24] x86: refactor psr: implement get value " Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 16/24] x86: refactor psr: implement set value callback functions " Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 17/24] x86: L2 CAT: implement CPU init and free flow Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 18/24] x86: L2 CAT: implement get hw info flow Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 19/24] x86: L2 CAT: implement get value flow Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 20/24] x86: L2 CAT: implement set " Yi Sun
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 21/24] tools: L2 CAT: support get HW info for L2 CAT Yi Sun
2017-01-27 15:18   ` Wei Liu
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 22/24] tools: L2 CAT: support show cbm " Yi Sun
2017-01-27 15:18   ` Wei Liu
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 23/24] tools: L2 CAT: support set " Yi Sun
2017-01-27 15:18   ` Wei Liu
2017-01-19  6:01 ` [PATCH RESEND v5 24/24] docs: add L2 CAT description in docs Yi Sun
2017-01-27 15:18   ` Wei Liu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170131024400.GA9186@char.us.ORACLE.com \
    --to=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
    --cc=he.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=mengxu@cis.upenn.edu \
    --cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    --cc=yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.