All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
To: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
	Zhang Xiong <xiong.y.zhang@intel.com>,
	Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>,
	Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com>,
	Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 08/11] x86: pmu: Improve instruction and branches events verification
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 06:14:58 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZgO5YgWK3eX-zlgc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240103031409.2504051-9-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>

On Wed, Jan 03, 2024, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> If HW supports GLOBAL_CTRL MSR, enabling and disabling PMCs are moved in
> __precise_count_loop(). Thus, instructions and branches events can be
> verified against a precise count instead of a rough range.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  x86/pmu.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c
> index 88b89ad889b9..b764827c1c3d 100644
> --- a/x86/pmu.c
> +++ b/x86/pmu.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,10 @@
>  	"nop; nop; nop; nop; nop; nop; nop;\n\t"	\
>  	"loop 1b;\n\t"
>  
> +/*Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL instructions */
> +#define PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS  (2 + 4)
> +#define PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS   (N * LOOP_INSTRNS + PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS)
> +#define PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES  (N)
>  #define PRECISE_LOOP_ASM						\
>  	"wrmsr;\n\t"							\
>  	"mov %%ecx, %%edi; mov %%ebx, %%ecx;\n\t"			\
> @@ -107,6 +111,24 @@ static inline void loop(u64 cntrs)
>  		__precise_count_loop(cntrs);
>  }
>  
> +static void adjust_events_range(struct pmu_event *gp_events, int branch_idx)
> +{
> +	/*
> +	 * If HW supports GLOBAL_CTRL MSR, enabling and disabling PMCs are
> +	 * moved in __precise_count_loop(). Thus, instructions and branches
> +	 * events can be verified against a precise count instead of a rough
> +	 * range.
> +	 */
> +	if (this_cpu_has_perf_global_ctrl()) {
> +		/* instructions event */
> +		gp_events[0].min = PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS;
> +		gp_events[0].max = PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS;
> +		/* branches event */
> +		gp_events[branch_idx].min = PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES;
> +		gp_events[branch_idx].max = PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES;
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  volatile uint64_t irq_received;
>  
>  static void cnt_overflow(isr_regs_t *regs)
> @@ -771,6 +793,7 @@ static void check_invalid_rdpmc_gp(void)
>  
>  int main(int ac, char **av)
>  {
> +	int branch_idx;
>  	setup_vm();
>  	handle_irq(PMI_VECTOR, cnt_overflow);
>  	buf = malloc(N*64);
> @@ -784,13 +807,16 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
>  		}
>  		gp_events = (struct pmu_event *)intel_gp_events;
>  		gp_events_size = sizeof(intel_gp_events)/sizeof(intel_gp_events[0]);
> +		branch_idx = 5;

This (and the follow up one) hardcoded index is hacky and more
importantly, error prone especially when code get refactored later.
Please use a proper way via macro? Eg., checking
INTEL_ARCH_BRANCHES_RETIRED_INDEX in pmu_counters_test.c might be a good
one.
>  		report_prefix_push("Intel");
>  		set_ref_cycle_expectations();
>  	} else {
>  		gp_events_size = sizeof(amd_gp_events)/sizeof(amd_gp_events[0]);
>  		gp_events = (struct pmu_event *)amd_gp_events;
> +		branch_idx = 2;
>  		report_prefix_push("AMD");
>  	}
> +	adjust_events_range(gp_events, branch_idx);
>  
>  	printf("PMU version:         %d\n", pmu.version);
>  	printf("GP counters:         %d\n", pmu.nr_gp_counters);
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-27  6:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-01-03  3:13 [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 00/11] pmu test bugs fix and improvements Dapeng Mi
2024-01-03  3:13 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 01/11] x86: pmu: Remove duplicate code in pmu_init() Dapeng Mi
2024-03-28  1:19   ` Yang, Weijiang
2024-03-28  1:21     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 02/11] x86: pmu: Enlarge cnt[] length to 64 in check_counters_many() Dapeng Mi
2024-03-25 21:41   ` Jim Mattson
2024-03-27  6:40     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 03/11] x86: pmu: Add asserts to warn inconsistent fixed events and counters Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27  5:30   ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-27  6:43     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-03-27 13:11   ` Jim Mattson
2024-03-28  9:29     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 04/11] x86: pmu: Switch instructions and core cycles events sequence Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27  5:36   ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-27  8:54     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-03-27 17:06       ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-28 10:09         ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 05/11] x86: pmu: Refine fixed_events[] names Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27  5:38   ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 06/11] x86: pmu: Remove blank line and redundant space Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27  5:38   ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-28  1:23   ` Yang, Weijiang
2024-03-28 10:12     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 07/11] x86: pmu: Enable and disable PMCs in loop() asm blob Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27  6:07   ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-27  8:55     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-08 23:17       ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-09  0:28         ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 08/11] x86: pmu: Improve instruction and branches events verification Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27  6:14   ` Mingwei Zhang [this message]
2024-03-27  8:59     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 09/11] x86: pmu: Improve LLC misses event verification Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27  6:23   ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-27  9:18     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-03-27 15:20   ` Yang, Weijiang
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 10/11] x86: pmu: Add IBPB indirect jump asm blob Dapeng Mi
2024-01-03  3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 11/11] x86: pmu: Improve branch misses event verification Dapeng Mi
2024-01-24  8:18 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 00/11] pmu test bugs fix and improvements Mi, Dapeng

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=ZgO5YgWK3eX-zlgc@google.com \
    --to=mizhang@google.com \
    --cc=cloudliang@tencent.com \
    --cc=dapeng1.mi@intel.com \
    --cc=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jmattson@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=like.xu.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=xiong.y.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=zhenyuw@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.