From: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
To: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhang Xiong <xiong.y.zhang@intel.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>,
Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests Patch 0/5] Fix PMU test failures on Sapphire Rapids
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 03:57:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZT8pkA28Q8zzDMrp@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <719318df-dc19-4f4c-88ff-5c69377f713c@linux.intel.com>
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023, Mi, Dapeng wrote:
> On 10/26/2023 7:47 AM, Mingwei Zhang wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2023, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> > > When running pmu test on Intel Sapphire Rapids, we found several
> > > failures are encountered, such as "llc misses" failure, "all counters"
> > > failure and "fixed counter 3" failure.
> > hmm, I have tested your series on a SPR machine. It looks like, all "llc
> > misses" already pass on my side. "all counters" always fail with/without
> > your patches. "fixed counter 3" never exists... I have "fixed
> > cntr-{0,1,2}" and "fixed-{0,1,2}"
>
> 1. "LLC misses" failure
>
> Yeah, the "LLC misses" failure is not always seen. I can see the "LLC
> misses" 2 ~3 times out of 10 runs of PMU standalone test and you could see
> the failure with higher possibility if you run the full kvm-unit-tests. I
> think whether you can see the "LLC misses" failure it really depends on
> current cache status on your system, how much cache memory are consumed by
> other programs. If there are lots of free cache lines on system when running
> the pmu test, you may have higher possibility to see the LLC misses failures
> just like what I see below.
>
> PASS: Intel: llc references-7
> *FAIL*: Intel: llc misses-0
> PASS: Intel: llc misses-1
> PASS: Intel: llc misses-2
>
> 2. "all counters" failure
>
> Actually the "all counters" failure are not always seen, but it doesn't mean
> current code is correct. In current code, the length of "cnt[10]" array in
> check_counters_many() is defined as 10, but there are at least 11 counters
> supported (8 GP counters + 3 fixed counters) on SPR even though fixed
> counter 3 is not supported in current upstream code. Obviously there would
> be out of range memory access in check_counters_many().
>
ok, I will double check on these. Thanks.
> >
> > You may want to double check the requirements of your series. Not just
> > under your setting without explainning those setting in detail.
> >
> > Maybe what I am missing is your topdown series? So, before your topdown
> > series checked in. I don't see value in this series.
>
> 3. "fixed counter 3" failure
>
> Yeah, I just realized I used the kernel which includes the vtopdown
> supporting patches after Jim's reminding. As the reply for Jim's comments
> says, the patches for support slots event are still valuable for current
> emulation framework and I would split them from the original vtopdown
> patchset and resend them as an independent patchset. Anyway, even though
> there is not slots event support in Kernel, it only impacts the patch 4/5,
> other patches are still valuable.
>
>
> >
> > Thanks.
> > -Mingwei
> > > Intel Sapphire Rapids introduces new fixed counter 3, total PMU counters
> > > including GP and fixed counters increase to 12 and also optimizes cache
> > > subsystem. All these changes make the original assumptions in pmu test
> > > unavailable any more on Sapphire Rapids. Patches 2-4 fixes these
> > > failures, patch 0 remove the duplicate code and patch 5 adds assert to
> > > ensure predefine fixed events are matched with HW fixed counters.
> > >
> > > Dapeng Mi (4):
> > > x86: pmu: Change the minimum value of llc_misses event to 0
> > > x86: pmu: Enlarge cnt array length to 64 in check_counters_many()
> > > x86: pmu: Support validation for Intel PMU fixed counter 3
> > > x86: pmu: Add asserts to warn inconsistent fixed events and counters
> > >
> > > Xiong Zhang (1):
> > > x86: pmu: Remove duplicate code in pmu_init()
> > >
> > > lib/x86/pmu.c | 5 -----
> > > x86/pmu.c | 17 ++++++++++++-----
> > > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > >
> > >
> > > base-commit: bfe5d7d0e14c8199d134df84d6ae8487a9772c48
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
> > >
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-30 3:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-24 7:57 [kvm-unit-tests Patch 0/5] Fix PMU test failures on Sapphire Rapids Dapeng Mi
2023-10-24 7:57 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch 1/5] x86: pmu: Remove duplicate code in pmu_init() Dapeng Mi
2023-10-24 7:57 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch 2/5] x86: pmu: Change the minimum value of llc_misses event to 0 Dapeng Mi
2023-10-24 13:03 ` Jim Mattson
2023-10-25 11:22 ` Mi, Dapeng
2023-10-25 12:35 ` Jim Mattson
2023-10-26 2:14 ` Mi, Dapeng
2023-10-26 12:19 ` Jim Mattson
2023-10-27 10:17 ` Mi, Dapeng
2023-10-24 7:57 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch 3/5] x86: pmu: Enlarge cnt array length to 64 in check_counters_many() Dapeng Mi
2023-10-24 7:57 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch 4/5] x86: pmu: Support validation for Intel PMU fixed counter 3 Dapeng Mi
2023-10-24 19:05 ` Jim Mattson
2023-10-25 11:26 ` Mi, Dapeng
2023-10-25 12:38 ` Jim Mattson
2023-10-26 2:29 ` Mi, Dapeng
2023-10-24 7:57 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch 5/5] x86: pmu: Add asserts to warn inconsistent fixed events and counters Dapeng Mi
2023-10-25 23:47 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch 0/5] Fix PMU test failures on Sapphire Rapids Mingwei Zhang
2023-10-26 3:32 ` Mi, Dapeng
2023-10-30 3:57 ` Mingwei Zhang [this message]
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=ZT8pkA28Q8zzDMrp@google.com \
--to=mizhang@google.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=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