From: "Ghimiray, Himal Prasad" <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
To: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>, <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>, <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com>,
<lucas.demarchi@intel.com>, <vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>,
<soham.purkait@intel.com>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/8] drm/xe/xe_pmu: Acquire forcewake on event init for engine events
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 12:21:24 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <71fed9a8-b8e2-4a38-bf2c-c328eb2d4673@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8ae02a6c-4459-43f6-8db9-95bb9a7cf898@intel.com>
On 07-02-2025 11:48, Riana Tauro wrote:
>
> Hi Himal
>
> On 2/7/2025 8:39 AM, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 06-02-2025 16:13, Riana Tauro wrote:
>>> When the engine events are created, acquire GT forcewake to read gpm
>>> timestamp required for the events and release on event destroy. This
>>> cannot be done during read due to the raw spinlock held my pmu.
>>>
>>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu_types.h | 8 ++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c
>>> index 06a1c72a3838..5b5fe4424aba 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu.c
>>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>> #include "xe_device.h"
>>> +#include "xe_force_wake.h"
>>> #include "xe_gt_idle.h"
>>> #include "xe_guc_engine_activity.h"
>>> #include "xe_hw_engine.h"
>>> @@ -102,6 +103,36 @@ static struct xe_hw_engine *event_to_hwe(struct
>>> perf_event *event)
>>> return hwe;
>>> }
>>> +static bool is_engine_event(u64 config)
>>> +{
>>> + unsigned int event_id = config_to_event_id(config);
>>> +
>>> + return (event_id == XE_PMU_EVENT_ENGINE_TOTAL_TICKS ||
>>> + event_id == XE_PMU_EVENT_ENGINE_ACTIVE_TICKS);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void event_gt_forcewake(struct perf_event *event)
>>> +{
>>> + struct xe_device *xe = container_of(event->pmu, typeof(*xe),
>>> pmu.base);
>>> + u64 config = event->attr.config;
>>> + struct xe_pmu *pmu = &xe->pmu;
>>> + struct xe_gt *gt;
>>> + unsigned int fw_ref;
>>> +
>>> + gt = xe_device_get_gt(xe, config_to_gt_id(config));
>>> + if (!gt || !is_engine_event(config))
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + fw_ref = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_GT);
>>> + if (!fw_ref)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + if (!pmu->fw_ref)
>>> + pmu->fw_ref = fw_ref;
>>> +
>>> + pmu->fw_count++;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static bool event_supported(struct xe_pmu *pmu, unsigned int gt,
>>> unsigned int id)
>>> {
>>> @@ -144,6 +175,13 @@ static bool event_param_valid(struct perf_event
>>> *event)
>>> static void xe_pmu_event_destroy(struct perf_event *event)
>>> {
>>> struct xe_device *xe = container_of(event->pmu, typeof(*xe),
>>> pmu.base);
>>> + struct xe_pmu *pmu = &xe->pmu;
>>> + struct xe_gt *gt;
>>> +
>>> + if (pmu->fw_count--) {
>>> + gt = xe_device_get_gt(xe, config_to_gt_id(event->attr.config));
>>> + xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(gt), pmu->fw_ref);
>>> + }
>>
>>
>> Considering that fw->lock will be acquired and released multiple times
>> during the put operation, this might create an overhead.
>>
>> How about implementing a _put function that can take the number of
>> refcounts to decrement as an input parameter, similar to
>> xe_force_wake_put_many?
> Could you give more details on your suggestion? Would put_many just
> decrement the count? But wouldn't that still require a lock? Multiple
> event_destroys can call the function at the same time right?
I was thinking about putting all refcounts at the end of last event
destroy in case of multiple pmu's.
>
>
> One thing that can be done is to take forcewake on first count and
> release it when the last event is destroyed in cases of multiple
> pmu being used
This sounds even better.
>>
>> If the overhead has already been considered and found to be
>> acceptable, I am fine with avoiding unnecessary modifications to this
>> patch.
> This is the first rev for this patch. Open to suggestions
>
> Background for this patch: force_wake is needed to read the timestamp
> register required for engine events.Cannot take it while reading the
> register from pmu_read due to a lockdep splat (PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING).
>
> The suggestion was to take forcewake throughout the duration of event
> being read
>
> Thanks
> Riana
>>
>>
>>> drm_WARN_ON(&xe->drm, event->parent);
>>> xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
>>> @@ -183,18 +221,23 @@ static int xe_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event
>>> *event)
>>> if (!event->parent) {
>>> drm_dev_get(&xe->drm);
>>> xe_pm_runtime_get(xe);
>>> + event_gt_forcewake(event);
>>> event->destroy = xe_pmu_event_destroy;
>>> }
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>> -static u64 read_engine_events(struct perf_event *event)
>>> +static u64 read_engine_events(struct perf_event *event, u64 prev)
>>> {
>>> struct xe_device *xe = container_of(event->pmu, typeof(*xe),
>>> pmu.base);
>>> + struct xe_pmu *pmu = &xe->pmu;
>>> struct xe_hw_engine *hwe;
>>> u64 val = 0;
>>> + if (!pmu->fw_count)
>>> + return prev;
>>> +
>>> hwe = event_to_hwe(event);
>>> if (!hwe)
>>> drm_warn(&xe->drm, "unknown pmu engine\n");
>>> @@ -218,7 +261,7 @@ static u64 __xe_pmu_event_read(struct perf_event
>>> *event, u64 prev)
>>> return xe_gt_idle_residency_msec(>->gtidle);
>>> case XE_PMU_EVENT_ENGINE_ACTIVE_TICKS:
>>> case XE_PMU_EVENT_ENGINE_TOTAL_TICKS:
>>> - return read_engine_events(event);
>>> + return read_engine_events(event, prev);
>>> }
>>> return 0;
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/
>>> xe_pmu_types.h
>>> index f5ba4d56622c..134b3400b19c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu_types.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pmu_types.h
>>> @@ -30,6 +30,14 @@ struct xe_pmu {
>>> * @name: Name as registered with perf core.
>>> */
>>> const char *name;
>>> + /**
>>> + * @fw_ref: force_wake ref
>>> + */
>>> + unsigned int fw_ref;
>>> + /**
>>> + * @fw_count: force_wake count
>>> + */
>>> + unsigned int fw_count;
>>> /**
>>> * @supported_events: Bitmap of supported events, indexed by
>>> event id
>>> */
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-07 6:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-06 10:43 [PATCH v5 0/8] PMU support for engine activity Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 10:40 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2025-02-06 10:41 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2025-02-06 10:42 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-02-06 10:43 ` [PATCH v5 1/8] drm/xe: Add engine activity support Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 18:28 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-02-10 7:07 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 10:43 ` [PATCH v5 2/8] drm/xe/trace: Add trace for engine activity Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 10:43 ` [PATCH v5 3/8] drm/xe/guc: Expose engine activity only for supported GuC version Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 18:39 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-02-07 7:59 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-07 21:37 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-02-10 7:28 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 10:43 ` [PATCH v5 4/8] drm/xe/xe_pmu: Add PMU support for engine activity Riana Tauro
2025-02-07 22:47 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-02-06 10:43 ` [PATCH v5 5/8] drm/xe/xe_pmu: Acquire forcewake on event init for engine events Riana Tauro
2025-02-07 3:09 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-02-07 6:18 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-07 6:51 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad [this message]
2025-02-07 23:31 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-02-10 10:20 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-11 17:33 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-02-12 5:01 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 10:43 ` [PATCH v5 6/8] drm/xe: Add support for per-function engine activity Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 19:06 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-02-07 8:11 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-07 23:50 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-02-06 10:43 ` [PATCH v5 7/8] drm/xe/xe_pmu: Add pmu support for per-function engine activity stats Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 19:15 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-02-07 7:52 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 10:43 ` [PATCH v5 8/8] drm/xe/pf: Enable " Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 11:20 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 19:29 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-02-07 6:25 ` Riana Tauro
2025-02-06 10:58 ` ✓ CI.Build: success for PMU support for engine activity Patchwork
2025-02-06 11:01 ` ✗ CI.Hooks: failure " Patchwork
2025-02-06 11:02 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: success " Patchwork
2025-02-06 11:28 ` ✗ Xe.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2025-02-06 12:36 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: " 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=71fed9a8-b8e2-4a38-bf2c-c328eb2d4673@intel.com \
--to=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=riana.tauro@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