All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@intel.com>
To: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
	"Zhang, Xiong Y" <xiong.y.zhang@intel.com>,
	Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>,
	Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>,
	Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com>,
	"Mi, Dapeng1" <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 09/11] x86: pmu: Improve LLC misses event verification
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 23:20:09 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ea33d2fa-6e69-4904-b5fd-ecec67e43352@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240103031409.2504051-10-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>

On 1/3/2024 11:14 AM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> When running pmu test on SPR, sometimes the following failure is
> reported.
>
> 1 <= 0 <= 1000000
> FAIL: Intel: llc misses-4
>
> Currently The LLC misses occurring only depends on probability. It's
> possible that there is no LLC misses happened in the whole loop(),
> especially along with processors have larger and larger cache size just
> like what we observed on SPR.
>
> Thus, add clflush instruction into the loop() asm blob and ensure once
> LLC miss is triggered at least.
>
> Suggested-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>   x86/pmu.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>   1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c
> index b764827c1c3d..8fd3db0fbf81 100644
> --- a/x86/pmu.c
> +++ b/x86/pmu.c
> @@ -20,19 +20,21 @@
>   
>   // Instrustion number of LOOP_ASM code
>   #define LOOP_INSTRNS	10
> -#define LOOP_ASM					\
> +#define LOOP_ASM(_clflush)				\
> +	_clflush "\n\t"                                 \
> +	"mfence;\n\t"                                   \
>   	"1: mov (%1), %2; add $64, %1;\n\t"		\
>   	"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)
> +/*Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL + clflush/mfence instructions */
> +#define PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS  (2 + 4 + 2)
>   #define PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS   (N * LOOP_INSTRNS + PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS)
>   #define PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES  (N)
> -#define PRECISE_LOOP_ASM						\
> +#define PRECISE_LOOP_ASM(_clflush)					\
>   	"wrmsr;\n\t"							\
>   	"mov %%ecx, %%edi; mov %%ebx, %%ecx;\n\t"			\
> -	LOOP_ASM							\
> +	LOOP_ASM(_clflush)						\
>   	"mov %%edi, %%ecx; xor %%eax, %%eax; xor %%edx, %%edx;\n\t"	\
>   	"wrmsr;\n\t"
>   
> @@ -72,14 +74,30 @@ char *buf;
>   static struct pmu_event *gp_events;
>   static unsigned int gp_events_size;
>   
> +#define _loop_asm(_clflush)					\
> +do {								\
> +	asm volatile(LOOP_ASM(_clflush)				\
> +		     : "=c"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)	\
> +		     : "0"(N), "1"(buf));			\
> +} while (0)
> +
> +#define _precise_loop_asm(_clflush)				\
> +do {								\
> +	asm volatile(PRECISE_LOOP_ASM(_clflush)			\
> +		     : "=b"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)	\
> +		     : "a"(eax), "d"(edx), "c"(global_ctl),	\
> +		       "0"(N), "1"(buf)				\
> +		     : "edi");					\
> +} while (0)
>   
>   static inline void __loop(void)
>   {
>   	unsigned long tmp, tmp2, tmp3;

Can you move these tmp variables into macro's do...while block since they're not
needed here?

>   
> -	asm volatile(LOOP_ASM
> -		     : "=c"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)
> -		     : "0"(N), "1"(buf));
> +	if (this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSH))
> +		_loop_asm("clflush (%1)");
> +	else
> +		_loop_asm("nop");
>   }
>   
>   /*
> @@ -96,11 +114,10 @@ static inline void __precise_count_loop(u64 cntrs)
>   	u32 eax = cntrs & (BIT_ULL(32) - 1);
>   	u32 edx = cntrs >> 32;

Ditto.

>   
> -	asm volatile(PRECISE_LOOP_ASM
> -		     : "=b"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)
> -		     : "a"(eax), "d"(edx), "c"(global_ctl),
> -		       "0"(N), "1"(buf)
> -		     : "edi");
> +	if (this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSH))
> +		_precise_loop_asm("clflush (%1)");
> +	else
> +		_precise_loop_asm("nop");
>   }
>   
>   static inline void loop(u64 cntrs)


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-03-27 15:20 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
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 [this message]
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=ea33d2fa-6e69-4904-b5fd-ecec67e43352@intel.com \
    --to=weijiang.yang@intel.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=mizhang@google.com \
    --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.