From: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
To: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>, <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>,
<lucas.demarchi@intel.com>, <vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>,
<ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>, <john.c.harrison@intel.com>,
<rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>, <aravind.iddamsetty@intel.com>,
<soham.purkait@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/10] drm/xe/pmu: Add PMU support for per-engine-class activity
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 18:56:49 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <704cb2ca-385b-4d99-b232-8cbb47437f27@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z4mv7kYyeZPHozf9@orsosgc001>
Hi Umesh
On 1/17/2025 6:48 AM, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
> Hi Riana,
>
> This is part 2 of the review:
Thank you for the review comments
>
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 01:25:58PM +0530, Riana Tauro wrote:
>> PMU provides two counters (engine-active-ticks, total-ticks)
>> to calculate engine acitivity. When querying engine busyness,
>> user must group these 2 counters using the perf_event
>> group mechanism to ensure both counters are sampled together.
>>
>> To list the events
>>
>> ./perf list
>> xe_0000_03_00.0/engine-active-ticks/ [Kernel PMU event]
>> xe_0000_03_00.0/total-ticks/ [Kernel PMU event]
>
> total ticks is also engine specific, so maybe we can use engine-total-
> ticks as the name.
Sure will use engine-total-ticks
>
>>
>> The formats to be used with the above are
>>
>> engine_class - config:12-19
>> engine_instance - config:20-27
>> gt_id - config:60-63
>>
>> The events can then be read using perf tool
>>
>> ./perf stat -e xe_0000_03_00.0/engine-active-ticks,gt_id=0,
>> engine_class=0,engine_instance=0/,
>> xe_0000_03_00.0/total-ticks,gt_id=0,
>> engine_class=0,engine_instance=0/ -I 1000
>>
>
> I am also wondering how a user knows what format bits are/are-not
> applicable to each events.
As of now, its mentioned in the documentation. But that is the reason i
was thinking adding the engine class in the name would be better
For example, if I pass engine class and
> instance to a frequency event, it shows unsupported. How does the
> implementation check for valid config?
The current approach first checks if it is engine event by checking
if the event type is active ticks or total-ticks
return ((sample == XE_PMU_ENGINE_ACTIVITY_TICKS) || (sample ==
XE_PMU_TOTAL_TICKS));
else it enters the config_status. config_status then checks all bits
apart from gt_id to check the sample. So it returns
unsupported
But that seems to have changed in the latest patches sent by Lucas
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/632764/?series=139121&rev=13
Approach might have to be tweaked
>
>> Engine activity can then be calculated as below
>> engine activity % = (engine active ticks/total ticks) * 100
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c | 5 ++
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c | 139 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu_types.h | 7 ++
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_uc.c | 3 +
>> 4 files changed, 131 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c
>> index 408365dfe4ee..f229745b78b9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc.c
>> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
>> #include "xe_guc_capture.h"
>> #include "xe_guc_ct.h"
>> #include "xe_guc_db_mgr.h"
>> +#include "xe_guc_engine_activity.h"
>> #include "xe_guc_hwconfig.h"
>> #include "xe_guc_log.h"
>> #include "xe_guc_pc.h"
>> @@ -743,6 +744,10 @@ int xe_guc_init_post_hwconfig(struct xe_guc *guc)
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>>
>> + ret = xe_guc_engine_activity_init(guc);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> return xe_guc_ads_init_post_hwconfig(&guc->ads);
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c
>> index bae8eb38fddd..5bd312b6b8f6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c
>> @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
>> #include "xe_force_wake.h"
>> #include "xe_gt_clock.h"
>> #include "xe_gt_idle.h"
>> +#include "xe_guc_engine_activity.h"
>> #include "xe_guc_pc.h"
>> +#include "xe_hw_engine.h"
>> #include "xe_mmio.h"
>> #include "xe_macros.h"
>> #include "xe_module.h"
>> @@ -90,6 +92,17 @@ static unsigned int xe_pmu_target_cpu = -1;
>> * 1950
>> * 1950
>> * 1950
>> + *
>> + * Engine Activity: PMU provides two counters (engine-active-ticks,
>> total-ticks) to calculate
>> + * engine activity. While querying the engine activity the user
>> should group these two counters
>> + * using the perf_event group mechanism to ensure both counters are
>> sampled together.
>> + *
>> + * To read a engine specific event for a GT of class 1 and instance 0
>> + *
>> + * perf stat -e xe_0000_03_00.0/engine-active-
>> ticks,gt_id=0,engine_class=1,engine_instance=0/,
>> + * xe_0000_03_00.0/total-
>> ticks,gt_id=0,engine_class=1,engine_instance=0/ -I 1000
>> + *
>> + * engine active % = (engine active ticks/total ticks) * 100
>> */
>>
>> static struct xe_pmu *event_to_pmu(struct perf_event *event)
>> @@ -107,6 +120,33 @@ static u64 config_counter(const u64 config)
>> return config & ~(~0ULL << __XE_PMU_GT_SHIFT);
>> }
>>
>> +static u64 engine_event_sample(const u64 config)
>> +{
>> + return config_counter(config) & 0xfff;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static u8 engine_event_class(const u64 config)
>> +{
>> + return (config_counter(config) >> XE_PMU_CLASS_SHIFT) & 0xff;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static u8 engine_event_instance(const u64 config)
>> +{
>> + return (config_counter(config) >> XE_PMU_INSTANCE_SHIFT) & 0xff;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static bool is_engine_event(struct xe_device *xe, const u64 config)
>> +{
>> + const u64 gt_id = config >> __XE_PMU_GT_SHIFT;
>> + struct xe_gt *gt = xe_device_get_gt(xe, gt_id);
>> + u64 sample = engine_event_sample(config);
>> +
>> + if (!xe_guc_engine_activity_supported(>->uc.guc))
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + return ((sample == XE_PMU_ENGINE_ACTIVITY_TICKS) || (sample ==
>> XE_PMU_TOTAL_TICKS));
>> +}
>> +
>> static unsigned int pm_bit(const u64 config)
>> {
>> unsigned int val;
>> @@ -192,6 +232,23 @@ config_status(struct xe_device *xe, u64 config)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static int engine_event_init(struct xe_device *xe, u64 config)
>> +{
>> + const unsigned int gt_id = config_gt_id(config);
>> + struct drm_xe_engine_class_instance eci;
>> + struct xe_hw_engine *hwe;
>> +
>> + eci.engine_class = engine_event_class(config);
>> + eci.engine_instance = engine_event_instance(config);
>> + eci.gt_id = gt_id;
>> +
>> + hwe = xe_hw_engine_lookup(xe, eci);
>
> Getting hwe from the config could be a helper since you have similar
> logic in __xe_pmu_event_read()
Will add an helper
>
>> + if (!hwe || xe_hw_engine_is_reserved(hwe))
>> + return -ENOENT;
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static int xe_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event *event)
>> {
>> struct xe_device *xe =
>> @@ -221,7 +278,12 @@ static int xe_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event
>> *event)
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> event_config = event->attr.config;
>> - ret = config_status(xe, event_config);
>> +
>> + if (is_engine_event(xe, event_config))
>> + ret = engine_event_init(xe, event_config);
>> + else
>> + ret = config_status(xe, event_config);
>> +
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>>
>> @@ -300,24 +362,49 @@ static u64 __xe_pmu_event_read(struct perf_event
>> *event)
>> struct xe_gt *gt = xe_device_get_gt(xe, gt_id);
>> u64 val = 0;
>>
>> - switch (config_counter(config)) {
>> - case XE_PMU_C6_RESIDENCY:
>> - val = get_c6(gt);
>> - break;
>> - case XE_PMU_ACTUAL_FREQUENCY:
>> - val =
>> - div_u64(read_sample(pmu, gt_id,
>> - __XE_SAMPLE_FREQ_ACT),
>> - USEC_PER_SEC /* to MHz */);
>> - break;
>> - case XE_PMU_REQUESTED_FREQUENCY:
>> - val =
>> - div_u64(read_sample(pmu, gt_id,
>> - __XE_SAMPLE_FREQ_REQ),
>> - USEC_PER_SEC /* to MHz */);
>> - break;
>> - default:
>> - drm_warn(>->tile->xe->drm, "unknown pmu event\n");
>> + if (is_engine_event(xe, config)) {
>> + struct drm_xe_engine_class_instance eci;
>> + struct xe_hw_engine *hwe;
>> + u64 sample = engine_event_sample(config);
>> +
>> + eci.engine_class = engine_event_class(config);
>> + eci.engine_instance = engine_event_instance(config);
>> + eci.gt_id = gt_id;
>> +
>> + hwe = xe_hw_engine_lookup(xe, eci);
>> + if (!hwe)
>> + drm_WARN_ON_ONCE(&xe->drm, "unknown engine\n");
>> +
>> + if (xe_pm_runtime_suspended(xe))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + if (sample == XE_PMU_ENGINE_ACTIVITY_TICKS)
>> + val = xe_guc_engine_activity_active_ticks(hwe);
>> + else if (sample == XE_PMU_TOTAL_TICKS)
>> + val = xe_guc_engine_activity_total_ticks(hwe);
>> + else
>> + drm_warn(&xe->drm, "unknown pmu engine event\n");
>
> Maybe also print the unknown sample/value for debug. Same for the else
> section below.
Sure will add it.
Thanks
Riana
>
> Rest looks good.
>
> Thanks,
> Umesh
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-17 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-06 7:55 [PATCH v3 00/10] PMU Support for per-engine-class activity Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] [DO NOT REVIEW] drm/xe/pmu: Enable PMU interface Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] [DO NOT REVIEW] drm/xe: Add locks in gtidle code Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] [DO NOT REVIEW] drm/xe/pmu: Add GT C6 events Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] [DO NOT REVIEW] drm/xe/pmu: Add GT frequency events Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] [DO NOT REVIEW] drm/xe/xe_pmu: add fixes for base PMU Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] drm/xe: Add per-engine-class activity support Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] drm/xe/trace: Add trace for engine activity Riana Tauro
2025-01-16 23:08 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] drm/xe/guc: Expose engine activity only for supported GuC version Riana Tauro
2025-01-16 23:10 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-01-27 10:05 ` Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] drm/xe/pmu: Add PMU support for per-engine-class activity Riana Tauro
2025-01-14 0:57 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-01-17 1:18 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-01-17 13:26 ` Riana Tauro [this message]
2025-01-06 7:55 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] drm/xe/guc: Bump minimum required GuC version to v70.36.0 Riana Tauro
2025-01-06 8:28 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for PMU Support for per-engine-class activity Patchwork
2025-01-06 8:29 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2025-01-06 8:30 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-01-06 8:48 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2025-01-06 8:50 ` ✗ CI.Hooks: failure " Patchwork
2025-01-06 8:52 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: success " Patchwork
2025-01-06 9:18 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-01-06 17:10 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
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=704cb2ca-385b-4d99-b232-8cbb47437f27@intel.com \
--to=riana.tauro@intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=aravind.iddamsetty@intel.com \
--cc=ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=john.c.harrison@intel.com \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=soham.purkait@intel.com \
--cc=umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com \
--cc=vinay.belgaumkar@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox