From: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf/core: Update perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context()
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2023 06:16:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZWrLrcsJ3_kFM8jd@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231120221932.213710-1-namhyung@kernel.org>
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> It was unnecessarily disabling and enabling PMUs for each event. It
> should be done at PMU level. Add pmu_ctx->nr_freq counter to check it
> at each PMU. As pmu context has separate active lists for pinned group
> and flexible group, factor out a new function to do the job.
>
> Another minor optimization is that it can skip PMUs w/ CAP_NO_INTERRUPT
> even if it needs to unthrottle sampling events.
>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
> ---
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 1 +
> kernel/events/core.c | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index 0367d748fae0..3eb17dc89f5e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -879,6 +879,7 @@ struct perf_event_pmu_context {
>
> unsigned int nr_events;
> unsigned int nr_cgroups;
> + unsigned int nr_freq;
>
> atomic_t refcount; /* event <-> epc */
> struct rcu_head rcu_head;
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 3eb26c2c6e65..53e2ad73102d 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -2275,8 +2275,10 @@ event_sched_out(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_event_context *ctx)
>
> if (!is_software_event(event))
> cpc->active_oncpu--;
> - if (event->attr.freq && event->attr.sample_freq)
> + if (event->attr.freq && event->attr.sample_freq) {
> ctx->nr_freq--;
> + epc->nr_freq--;
> + }
> if (event->attr.exclusive || !cpc->active_oncpu)
> cpc->exclusive = 0;
>
> @@ -2531,9 +2533,10 @@ event_sched_in(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_event_context *ctx)
>
> if (!is_software_event(event))
> cpc->active_oncpu++;
> - if (event->attr.freq && event->attr.sample_freq)
> + if (event->attr.freq && event->attr.sample_freq) {
> ctx->nr_freq++;
> -
> + epc->nr_freq++;
> + }
> if (event->attr.exclusive)
> cpc->exclusive = 1;
>
> @@ -4096,30 +4099,14 @@ static void perf_adjust_period(struct perf_event *event, u64 nsec, u64 count, bo
> }
> }
>
> -/*
> - * combine freq adjustment with unthrottling to avoid two passes over the
> - * events. At the same time, make sure, having freq events does not change
> - * the rate of unthrottling as that would introduce bias.
> - */
> -static void
> -perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool unthrottle)
> +static void perf_adjust_freq_unthr_events(struct list_head *event_list)
> {
> struct perf_event *event;
> struct hw_perf_event *hwc;
> u64 now, period = TICK_NSEC;
> s64 delta;
>
> - /*
> - * only need to iterate over all events iff:
> - * - context have events in frequency mode (needs freq adjust)
> - * - there are events to unthrottle on this cpu
> - */
> - if (!(ctx->nr_freq || unthrottle))
> - return;
> -
> - raw_spin_lock(&ctx->lock);
> -
> - list_for_each_entry_rcu(event, &ctx->event_list, event_entry) {
> + list_for_each_entry(event, event_list, active_list) {
> if (event->state != PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE)
> continue;
>
> @@ -4127,8 +4114,6 @@ perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool unthrottle)
> if (!event_filter_match(event))
> continue;
>
> - perf_pmu_disable(event->pmu);
> -
> hwc = &event->hw;
>
> if (hwc->interrupts == MAX_INTERRUPTS) {
> @@ -4138,7 +4123,7 @@ perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool unthrottle)
> }
>
> if (!event->attr.freq || !event->attr.sample_freq)
> - goto next;
> + continue;
>
> /*
> * stop the event and update event->count
> @@ -4160,8 +4145,39 @@ perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool unthrottle)
> perf_adjust_period(event, period, delta, false);
>
> event->pmu->start(event, delta > 0 ? PERF_EF_RELOAD : 0);
> - next:
> - perf_pmu_enable(event->pmu);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * combine freq adjustment with unthrottling to avoid two passes over the
> + * events. At the same time, make sure, having freq events does not change
> + * the rate of unthrottling as that would introduce bias.
> + */
> +static void
> +perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool unthrottle)
> +{
> + struct perf_event_pmu_context *pmu_ctx;
> +
> + /*
> + * only need to iterate over all events iff:
> + * - context have events in frequency mode (needs freq adjust)
> + * - there are events to unthrottle on this cpu
> + */
> + if (!(ctx->nr_freq || unthrottle))
> + return;
> +
> + raw_spin_lock(&ctx->lock);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(pmu_ctx, &ctx->pmu_ctx_list, pmu_ctx_entry) {
> + if (!(pmu_ctx->nr_freq || unthrottle))
> + continue;
> + if (pmu_ctx->pmu->capabilities & PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_INTERRUPT)
> + continue;
> +
> + perf_pmu_disable(pmu_ctx->pmu);
> + perf_adjust_freq_unthr_events(&pmu_ctx->pinned_active);
> + perf_adjust_freq_unthr_events(&pmu_ctx->flexible_active);
> + perf_pmu_enable(pmu_ctx->pmu);
> }
>
> raw_spin_unlock(&ctx->lock);
> --
> 2.43.0.rc1.413.gea7ed67945-goog
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-02 6:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-20 22:19 [PATCH 1/3] perf/core: Update perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context() Namhyung Kim
2023-11-20 22:19 ` [PATCH 2/3] perf/core: Reduce PMU access to adjust sample freq Namhyung Kim
2023-11-21 15:57 ` Liang, Kan
2023-11-20 22:19 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf/x86: Add CAP_NO_INTERRUPT for uncore PMUs Namhyung Kim
2023-11-21 15:59 ` Liang, Kan
2023-11-21 18:30 ` Namhyung Kim
2023-11-21 19:26 ` Liang, Kan
2023-12-01 20:29 ` Namhyung Kim
2023-11-20 22:41 ` [PATCH 1/3] perf/core: Update perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context() Ian Rogers
2023-11-20 23:23 ` Mingwei Zhang
2023-11-21 18:21 ` Namhyung Kim
2023-11-21 23:01 ` Mingwei Zhang
2023-11-24 0:50 ` Mingwei Zhang
2023-11-21 15:57 ` Liang, Kan
2023-12-02 6:16 ` Mingwei Zhang [this message]
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=ZWrLrcsJ3_kFM8jd@google.com \
--to=mizhang@google.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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.