From: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
To: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
Zhang Xiong <xiong.y.zhang@intel.com>,
Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>,
Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com>,
Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 08/11] x86: pmu: Improve instruction and branches events verification
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 06:14:58 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZgO5YgWK3eX-zlgc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240103031409.2504051-9-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
On Wed, Jan 03, 2024, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> 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.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> x86/pmu.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c
> index 88b89ad889b9..b764827c1c3d 100644
> --- a/x86/pmu.c
> +++ b/x86/pmu.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,10 @@
> "nop; nop; nop; nop; nop; nop; nop;\n\t" \
> "loop 1b;\n\t"
>
> +/*Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL instructions */
> +#define PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS (2 + 4)
> +#define PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS (N * LOOP_INSTRNS + PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS)
> +#define PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES (N)
> #define PRECISE_LOOP_ASM \
> "wrmsr;\n\t" \
> "mov %%ecx, %%edi; mov %%ebx, %%ecx;\n\t" \
> @@ -107,6 +111,24 @@ static inline void loop(u64 cntrs)
> __precise_count_loop(cntrs);
> }
>
> +static void adjust_events_range(struct pmu_event *gp_events, int branch_idx)
> +{
> + /*
> + * 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.
> + */
> + if (this_cpu_has_perf_global_ctrl()) {
> + /* instructions event */
> + gp_events[0].min = PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS;
> + gp_events[0].max = PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS;
> + /* branches event */
> + gp_events[branch_idx].min = PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES;
> + gp_events[branch_idx].max = PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES;
> + }
> +}
> +
> volatile uint64_t irq_received;
>
> static void cnt_overflow(isr_regs_t *regs)
> @@ -771,6 +793,7 @@ static void check_invalid_rdpmc_gp(void)
>
> int main(int ac, char **av)
> {
> + int branch_idx;
> setup_vm();
> handle_irq(PMI_VECTOR, cnt_overflow);
> buf = malloc(N*64);
> @@ -784,13 +807,16 @@ 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]);
> + branch_idx = 5;
This (and the follow up one) hardcoded index is hacky and more
importantly, error prone especially when code get refactored later.
Please use a proper way via macro? Eg., checking
INTEL_ARCH_BRANCHES_RETIRED_INDEX in pmu_counters_test.c might be a good
one.
> 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;
> + branch_idx = 2;
> report_prefix_push("AMD");
> }
> + adjust_events_range(gp_events, branch_idx);
>
> printf("PMU version: %d\n", pmu.version);
> printf("GP counters: %d\n", pmu.nr_gp_counters);
> --
> 2.34.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-27 6:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-03 3:13 [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 00/11] pmu test bugs fix and improvements Dapeng Mi
2024-01-03 3:13 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 01/11] x86: pmu: Remove duplicate code in pmu_init() Dapeng Mi
2024-03-28 1:19 ` Yang, Weijiang
2024-03-28 1:21 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 02/11] x86: pmu: Enlarge cnt[] length to 64 in check_counters_many() Dapeng Mi
2024-03-25 21:41 ` Jim Mattson
2024-03-27 6:40 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 03/11] x86: pmu: Add asserts to warn inconsistent fixed events and counters Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27 5:30 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-27 6:43 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-03-27 13:11 ` Jim Mattson
2024-03-28 9:29 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 04/11] x86: pmu: Switch instructions and core cycles events sequence Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27 5:36 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-27 8:54 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-03-27 17:06 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-28 10:09 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 05/11] x86: pmu: Refine fixed_events[] names Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27 5:38 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 06/11] x86: pmu: Remove blank line and redundant space Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27 5:38 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-28 1:23 ` Yang, Weijiang
2024-03-28 10:12 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 07/11] x86: pmu: Enable and disable PMCs in loop() asm blob Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27 6:07 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-27 8:55 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-08 23:17 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-09 0:28 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 08/11] x86: pmu: Improve instruction and branches events verification Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27 6:14 ` Mingwei Zhang [this message]
2024-03-27 8:59 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 09/11] x86: pmu: Improve LLC misses event verification Dapeng Mi
2024-03-27 6:23 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-03-27 9:18 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-03-27 15:20 ` Yang, Weijiang
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 10/11] x86: pmu: Add IBPB indirect jump asm blob Dapeng Mi
2024-01-03 3:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 11/11] x86: pmu: Improve branch misses event verification Dapeng Mi
2024-01-24 8:18 ` [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 00/11] pmu test bugs fix and improvements Mi, Dapeng
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=ZgO5YgWK3eX-zlgc@google.com \
--to=mizhang@google.com \
--cc=cloudliang@tencent.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