public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
	Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Xiong Zhang <xiong.y.zhang@intel.com>,
	Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
	Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>,
	Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com>,
	Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>,
	Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Subject: [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 13/17] x86: pmu: Improve LLC misses event verification
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:52:29 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240419035233.3837621-14-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240419035233.3837621-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>

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 | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c
index 1f81d96030e4..fcae60d33966 100644
--- a/x86/pmu.c
+++ b/x86/pmu.c
@@ -19,19 +19,30 @@
 #define EXPECTED_BRNCH 5
 
 
-/* Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL instructions */
-#define EXTRA_INSTRNS  (3 + 3)
+/* Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL + clflush/mfence instructions */
+#define EXTRA_INSTRNS  (3 + 3 + 2)
 #define LOOP_INSTRNS   (N * 10 + EXTRA_INSTRNS)
 #define LOOP_BRANCHES  (N)
-#define LOOP_ASM(_wrmsr)						\
+#define LOOP_ASM(_wrmsr, _clflush)					\
 	_wrmsr "\n\t"							\
 	"mov %%ecx, %%edi; mov %%ebx, %%ecx;\n\t"			\
+	_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"							\
 	"mov %%edi, %%ecx; xor %%eax, %%eax; xor %%edx, %%edx;\n\t"	\
 	_wrmsr "\n\t"
 
+#define _loop_asm(_wrmsr, _clflush)				\
+do {								\
+	asm volatile(LOOP_ASM(_wrmsr, _clflush)			\
+		     : "=b"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)	\
+		     : "a"(eax), "d"(edx), "c"(global_ctl),	\
+		       "0"(N), "1"(buf)				\
+		     : "edi");					\
+} while (0)
+
 typedef struct {
 	uint32_t ctr;
 	uint32_t idx;
@@ -87,14 +98,17 @@ char *buf;
 static struct pmu_event *gp_events;
 static unsigned int gp_events_size;
 
-
 static inline void __loop(void)
 {
 	unsigned long tmp, tmp2, tmp3;
+	u32 global_ctl = 0;
+	u32 eax = 0;
+	u32 edx = 0;
 
-	asm volatile(LOOP_ASM("nop")
-		     : "=c"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)
-		     : "0"(N), "1"(buf));
+	if (this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSH))
+		_loop_asm("nop", "clflush (%1)");
+	else
+		_loop_asm("nop", "nop");
 }
 
 /*
@@ -107,15 +121,14 @@ static inline void __loop(void)
 static inline void __precise_loop(u64 cntrs)
 {
 	unsigned long tmp, tmp2, tmp3;
-	unsigned int global_ctl = pmu.msr_global_ctl;
+	u32 global_ctl = pmu.msr_global_ctl;
 	u32 eax = cntrs & (BIT_ULL(32) - 1);
 	u32 edx = cntrs >> 32;
 
-	asm volatile(LOOP_ASM("wrmsr")
-		     : "=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))
+		_loop_asm("wrmsr", "clflush (%1)");
+	else
+		_loop_asm("wrmsr", "nop");
 }
 
 static inline void loop(u64 cntrs)
-- 
2.34.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-04-19  3:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-19  3:52 [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 00/17] pmu test bugs fix and improvements Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 01/17] x86: pmu: Remove duplicate code in pmu_init() Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 02/17] x86: pmu: Remove blank line and redundant space Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 03/17] x86: pmu: Refine fixed_events[] names Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 04/17] x86: pmu: Fix the issue that pmu_counter_t.config crosses cache line Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 05/17] x86: pmu: Enlarge cnt[] length to 48 in check_counters_many() Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 06/17] x86: pmu: Add asserts to warn inconsistent fixed events and counters Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 07/17] x86: pmu: Fix cycles event validation failure Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 08/17] x86: pmu: Use macro to replace hard-coded branches event index Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 09/17] x86: pmu: Use macro to replace hard-coded ref-cycles " Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 10/17] x86: pmu: Use macro to replace hard-coded instructions " Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 11/17] x86: pmu: Enable and disable PMCs in loop() asm blob Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 12/17] x86: pmu: Improve instruction and branches events verification Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` Dapeng Mi [this message]
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 14/17] x86: pmu: Adjust lower boundary of llc-misses event to 0 for legacy CPUs Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 15/17] x86: pmu: Add IBPB indirect jump asm blob Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 16/17] x86: pmu: Adjust lower boundary of branch-misses event Dapeng Mi
2024-04-19  3:52 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v4 17/17] x86: pmu: Optimize emulated instruction validation Dapeng Mi

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=20240419035233.3837621-14-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
    --to=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=cloudliang@tencent.com \
    --cc=dapeng1.mi@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox