kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
	Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>,
	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>,
	Yongwei Ma <yongwei.ma@intel.com>,
	Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>,
	Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Subject: [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 13/18] x86: pmu: Improve instruction and branches events verification
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2024 10:17:23 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240914101728.33148-14-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240914101728.33148-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>

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.

BTW, some intermittent failures on AMD processors using PerfMonV2 is
seen due to variance in counts. This probably has to do with the way
instructions leading to a VM-Entry or VM-Exit are accounted when
counting retired instructions and branches.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/6d512a14-ace1-41a3-801e-0beb41425734@amd.com/

So only enable this precise check for Intel processors.

Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
---
 x86/pmu.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)

diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c
index 270f11b9..13c7c45d 100644
--- a/x86/pmu.c
+++ b/x86/pmu.c
@@ -19,6 +19,11 @@
 #define EXPECTED_INSTR 17
 #define EXPECTED_BRNCH 5
 
+
+/* Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL instructions */
+#define EXTRA_INSTRNS  (3 + 3)
+#define LOOP_INSTRNS   (N * 10 + EXTRA_INSTRNS)
+#define LOOP_BRANCHES  (N)
 #define LOOP_ASM(_wrmsr)						\
 	_wrmsr "\n\t"							\
 	"mov %%ecx, %%edi; mov %%ebx, %%ecx;\n\t"			\
@@ -123,6 +128,30 @@ static inline void loop(u64 cntrs)
 		__precise_loop(cntrs);
 }
 
+static void adjust_events_range(struct pmu_event *gp_events,
+				int instruction_idx, int branch_idx)
+{
+	/*
+	 * If HW supports GLOBAL_CTRL MSR, enabling and disabling PMCs are
+	 * moved in __precise_loop(). Thus, instructions and branches events
+	 * can be verified against a precise count instead of a rough range.
+	 *
+	 * We see some intermittent failures on AMD processors using PerfMonV2
+	 * due to variance in counts. This probably has to do with the way
+	 * instructions leading to a VM-Entry or VM-Exit are accounted when
+	 * counting retired instructions and branches. Thus only enable the
+	 * precise validation for Intel processors.
+	 */
+	if (pmu.is_intel && this_cpu_has_perf_global_ctrl()) {
+		/* instructions event */
+		gp_events[instruction_idx].min = LOOP_INSTRNS;
+		gp_events[instruction_idx].max = LOOP_INSTRNS;
+		/* branches event */
+		gp_events[branch_idx].min = LOOP_BRANCHES;
+		gp_events[branch_idx].max = LOOP_BRANCHES;
+	}
+}
+
 volatile uint64_t irq_received;
 
 static void cnt_overflow(isr_regs_t *regs)
@@ -832,6 +861,9 @@ static void check_invalid_rdpmc_gp(void)
 
 int main(int ac, char **av)
 {
+	int instruction_idx;
+	int branch_idx;
+
 	setup_vm();
 	handle_irq(PMI_VECTOR, cnt_overflow);
 	buf = malloc(N*64);
@@ -845,13 +877,18 @@ 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]);
+		instruction_idx = INTEL_INSTRUCTIONS_IDX;
+		branch_idx = INTEL_BRANCHES_IDX;
 		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;
+		instruction_idx = AMD_INSTRUCTIONS_IDX;
+		branch_idx = AMD_BRANCHES_IDX;
 		report_prefix_push("AMD");
 	}
+	adjust_events_range(gp_events, instruction_idx, branch_idx);
 
 	printf("PMU version:         %d\n", pmu.version);
 	printf("GP counters:         %d\n", pmu.nr_gp_counters);
-- 
2.40.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-09-14  7:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-14 10:17 [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 00/18] pmu test bugs fix and improvements Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 01/18] x86: pmu: Remove duplicate code in pmu_init() Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 02/18] x86: pmu: Remove blank line and redundant space Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 03/18] x86: pmu: Refine fixed_events[] names Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 04/18] x86: pmu: Fix the issue that pmu_counter_t.config crosses cache line Dapeng Mi
2025-02-14 21:05   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-18  9:07     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 05/18] x86: pmu: Enlarge cnt[] length to 48 in check_counters_many() Dapeng Mi
2025-02-14 21:06   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-18  9:24     ` Mi, Dapeng
2025-02-18 15:56       ` Sean Christopherson
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 06/18] x86: pmu: Print measured event count if test fails Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 07/18] x86: pmu: Fix potential out of bound access for fixed events Dapeng Mi
2025-02-14 21:07   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-18  9:34     ` Mi, Dapeng
2025-02-18 15:04       ` Sean Christopherson
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 08/18] x86: pmu: Fix cycles event validation failure Dapeng Mi
2025-02-14 21:07   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-18  9:36     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 09/18] x86: pmu: Use macro to replace hard-coded branches event index Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 10/18] x86: pmu: Use macro to replace hard-coded ref-cycles " Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 11/18] x86: pmu: Use macro to replace hard-coded instructions " Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 12/18] x86: pmu: Enable and disable PMCs in loop() asm blob Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` Dapeng Mi [this message]
2025-02-14 21:08   ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 13/18] x86: pmu: Improve instruction and branches events verification Sean Christopherson
2025-02-18  9:40     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 14/18] x86: pmu: Improve LLC misses event verification Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 15/18] x86: pmu: Adjust lower boundary of llc-misses event to 0 for legacy CPUs Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 16/18] x86: pmu: Add IBPB indirect jump asm blob Dapeng Mi
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 17/18] x86: pmu: Adjust lower boundary of branch-misses event Dapeng Mi
2025-02-14 21:09   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-02-18  9:42     ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-09-14 10:17 ` [kvm-unit-tests patch v6 18/18] 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=20240914101728.33148-14-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=yongwei.ma@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).