All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	wei.w.wang@intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
	Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: [PATCH v10 04/11] perf/x86: Add constraint to create guest LBR event without hw counter
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 16:14:05 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200423081412.164863-5-like.xu@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200423081412.164863-1-like.xu@linux.intel.com>

The hypervisor may request the perf subsystem to schedule a time window
to directly access the LBR stack msrs for its own use. Normally, it would
create a guest LBR event with callstack mode enabled, which is scheduled
along with other ordinary LBR events on the host but in an exclusive way.

To avoid wasting a counter for the guest LBR event, the perf tracks it via
needs_guest_lbr_without_counter() and assigns it with a fake VLBR counter
with the help of new lbr_without_counter_constraint. As with the BTS event,
there is actually no hardware counter assigned for the guest LBR event.

Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
---
 arch/x86/events/core.c            |  1 +
 arch/x86/events/intel/core.c      | 17 +++++++++++++++++
 arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c       |  3 +++
 arch/x86/events/perf_event.h      | 12 ++++++++++++
 arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h | 16 +++++++++++++++-
 include/linux/perf_event.h        |  7 +++++++
 kernel/events/core.c              |  7 -------
 7 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/events/core.c b/arch/x86/events/core.c
index f7a259dcbb06..2405926e2dba 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/core.c
@@ -1104,6 +1104,7 @@ static inline void x86_assign_hw_event(struct perf_event *event,
 
 	switch (hwc->idx) {
 	case INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_BTS:
+	case INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_VLBR:
 		hwc->config_base = 0;
 		hwc->event_base	= 0;
 		break;
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
index f1439acbf7e6..fe5595275368 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
@@ -2621,6 +2621,19 @@ intel_bts_constraints(struct perf_event *event)
 	return NULL;
 }
 
+/*
+ * Note, the event that satisfies this constraint will not be assigned
+ * with a normal hardware counter but a fake one like BTS event.
+ */
+static struct event_constraint *
+intel_guest_lbr_constraints(struct perf_event *event)
+{
+	if (unlikely(needs_guest_lbr_without_counter(event)))
+		return &lbr_without_counter_constraint;
+
+	return NULL;
+}
+
 static int intel_alt_er(int idx, u64 config)
 {
 	int alt_idx = idx;
@@ -2811,6 +2824,10 @@ __intel_get_event_constraints(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc, int idx,
 {
 	struct event_constraint *c;
 
+	c = intel_guest_lbr_constraints(event);
+	if (c)
+		return c;
+
 	c = intel_bts_constraints(event);
 	if (c)
 		return c;
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
index 6c60dcaaaf69..2fca4aff7621 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
@@ -1363,3 +1363,6 @@ int x86_perf_get_lbr(struct x86_pmu_lbr *stack)
 	return 0;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(x86_perf_get_lbr);
+
+struct event_constraint lbr_without_counter_constraint =
+	EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0, 1ULL << INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_VLBR, 0);
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/perf_event.h b/arch/x86/events/perf_event.h
index 1025bc6eb04f..e6e8c626ed00 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/perf_event.h
+++ b/arch/x86/events/perf_event.h
@@ -969,6 +969,17 @@ static inline bool intel_pmu_has_bts(struct perf_event *event)
 	return intel_pmu_has_bts_period(event, hwc->sample_period);
 }
 
+/*
+ * It's safe to generate an event with attr.exclude_host set and also
+ * using LBR to profile guest for other in-kernel users because the
+ * intel_guest_lbr_constraints() makes LBR registers to be used exclusively.
+ */
+static inline bool needs_guest_lbr_without_counter(struct perf_event *event)
+{
+	return needs_branch_stack(event) && is_kernel_event(event) &&
+			event->attr.exclude_host;
+}
+
 int intel_pmu_save_and_restart(struct perf_event *event);
 
 struct event_constraint *
@@ -989,6 +1000,7 @@ void release_ds_buffers(void);
 void reserve_ds_buffers(void);
 
 extern struct event_constraint bts_constraint;
+extern struct event_constraint lbr_without_counter_constraint;
 
 void intel_pmu_enable_bts(u64 config);
 
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h
index 5071515f6b0f..7be581027ebb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h
@@ -192,9 +192,23 @@ struct x86_pmu_capability {
 #define GLOBAL_STATUS_UNC_OVF				BIT_ULL(61)
 #define GLOBAL_STATUS_ASIF				BIT_ULL(60)
 #define GLOBAL_STATUS_COUNTERS_FROZEN			BIT_ULL(59)
-#define GLOBAL_STATUS_LBRS_FROZEN			BIT_ULL(58)
+#define GLOBAL_STATUS_LBRS_FROZEN_BIT			58
+#define GLOBAL_STATUS_LBRS_FROZEN			BIT_ULL(GLOBAL_STATUS_LBRS_FROZEN_BIT)
 #define GLOBAL_STATUS_TRACE_TOPAPMI			BIT_ULL(55)
 
+/*
+ * We model guest LBR event tracing as another fixed-mode PMC like BTS.
+ *
+ * We choose bit 58 because it's used to indicate LBR stack frozen state
+ * for architectural perfmon v4, also we unconditionally mask that bit in
+ * the handle_pmi_common(), so it'll never be set in the overflow handling.
+ *
+ * With this fake counter assigned, the guest LBR event user (such as KVM),
+ * can program the LBR registers on its own, and we don't actually do anything
+ * with then in the host context.
+ */
+#define INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_VLBR	GLOBAL_STATUS_LBRS_FROZEN_BIT
+
 /*
  * Adaptive PEBS v4
  */
diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
index 8768a39b5258..e25930fa526c 100644
--- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -1101,6 +1101,13 @@ static inline bool is_sampling_event(struct perf_event *event)
 	return event->attr.sample_period != 0;
 }
 
+#define TASK_TOMBSTONE ((void *)-1L)
+
+static inline bool is_kernel_event(struct perf_event *event)
+{
+	return READ_ONCE(event->owner) == TASK_TOMBSTONE;
+}
+
 /*
  * Return 1 for a software event, 0 for a hardware event
  */
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index e1459df73043..5ea22596ede2 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -165,13 +165,6 @@ static void perf_ctx_unlock(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx,
 	raw_spin_unlock(&cpuctx->ctx.lock);
 }
 
-#define TASK_TOMBSTONE ((void *)-1L)
-
-static bool is_kernel_event(struct perf_event *event)
-{
-	return READ_ONCE(event->owner) == TASK_TOMBSTONE;
-}
-
 /*
  * On task ctx scheduling...
  *
-- 
2.21.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-04-23  8:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-23  8:14 [PATCH v10 00/11] Guest Last Branch Recording Enabling Like Xu
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 01/11] perf/x86: Fix variable type for LBR registers Like Xu
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 02/11] perf/x86/core: Refactor hw->idx checks and cleanup Like Xu
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 03/11] perf/x86/lbr: Add interface to get basic information about LBR stack Like Xu
2020-04-23  8:14 ` Like Xu [this message]
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 05/11] perf/x86: Keep LBR stack unchanged in host context for guest LBR event Like Xu
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 06/11] KVM: x86: Add KVM_CAP_X86_GUEST_LBR to dis/enable LBR from user-space Like Xu
2020-04-27 16:23   ` kbuild test robot
2020-04-27 16:23     ` kbuild test robot
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 07/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Tweak kvm_pmu_get_msr to pass 'struct msr_data' in Like Xu
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 08/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Add LBR feature emulation via guest LBR event Like Xu
2020-04-24 12:16   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-27  3:16     ` Like Xu
2020-05-08  8:48       ` Like Xu
2020-05-08 13:09       ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-12  4:58         ` Xu, Like
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 09/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Release guest LBR event via vPMU lazy release mechanism Like Xu
2020-04-28  5:06   ` kbuild test robot
2020-04-28  5:06     ` kbuild test robot
2020-04-28  5:06   ` [RFC PATCH] KVM: x86/pmu: kvm_pmu_lbr_cleanup() can be static kbuild test robot
2020-04-28  5:06     ` kbuild test robot
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 10/11] KVM: x86: Expose MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES for LBR record format Like Xu
2020-04-23  8:14 ` [PATCH v10 11/11] KVM: x86: Remove the common trap handler of the MSR_IA32_DEBUGCTLMSR Like Xu

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=20200423081412.164863-5-like.xu@linux.intel.com \
    --to=like.xu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jmattson@google.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    --cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
    --cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
    --cc=wei.w.wang@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.