From: "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@intel.com>
To: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
"Zhang, Xiong Y" <xiong.y.zhang@intel.com>,
Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>,
Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>,
Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@tencent.com>,
"Mi, Dapeng1" <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 09/11] x86: pmu: Improve LLC misses event verification
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 23:20:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ea33d2fa-6e69-4904-b5fd-ecec67e43352@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240103031409.2504051-10-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
On 1/3/2024 11:14 AM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> 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 | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c
> index b764827c1c3d..8fd3db0fbf81 100644
> --- a/x86/pmu.c
> +++ b/x86/pmu.c
> @@ -20,19 +20,21 @@
>
> // Instrustion number of LOOP_ASM code
> #define LOOP_INSTRNS 10
> -#define LOOP_ASM \
> +#define LOOP_ASM(_clflush) \
> + _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"
>
> -/*Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL instructions */
> -#define PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS (2 + 4)
> +/*Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL + clflush/mfence instructions */
> +#define PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS (2 + 4 + 2)
> #define PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS (N * LOOP_INSTRNS + PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS)
> #define PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES (N)
> -#define PRECISE_LOOP_ASM \
> +#define PRECISE_LOOP_ASM(_clflush) \
> "wrmsr;\n\t" \
> "mov %%ecx, %%edi; mov %%ebx, %%ecx;\n\t" \
> - LOOP_ASM \
> + LOOP_ASM(_clflush) \
> "mov %%edi, %%ecx; xor %%eax, %%eax; xor %%edx, %%edx;\n\t" \
> "wrmsr;\n\t"
>
> @@ -72,14 +74,30 @@ char *buf;
> static struct pmu_event *gp_events;
> static unsigned int gp_events_size;
>
> +#define _loop_asm(_clflush) \
> +do { \
> + asm volatile(LOOP_ASM(_clflush) \
> + : "=c"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3) \
> + : "0"(N), "1"(buf)); \
> +} while (0)
> +
> +#define _precise_loop_asm(_clflush) \
> +do { \
> + asm volatile(PRECISE_LOOP_ASM(_clflush) \
> + : "=b"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3) \
> + : "a"(eax), "d"(edx), "c"(global_ctl), \
> + "0"(N), "1"(buf) \
> + : "edi"); \
> +} while (0)
>
> static inline void __loop(void)
> {
> unsigned long tmp, tmp2, tmp3;
Can you move these tmp variables into macro's do...while block since they're not
needed here?
>
> - asm volatile(LOOP_ASM
> - : "=c"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)
> - : "0"(N), "1"(buf));
> + if (this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSH))
> + _loop_asm("clflush (%1)");
> + else
> + _loop_asm("nop");
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -96,11 +114,10 @@ static inline void __precise_count_loop(u64 cntrs)
> u32 eax = cntrs & (BIT_ULL(32) - 1);
> u32 edx = cntrs >> 32;
Ditto.
>
> - asm volatile(PRECISE_LOOP_ASM
> - : "=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))
> + _precise_loop_asm("clflush (%1)");
> + else
> + _precise_loop_asm("nop");
> }
>
> static inline void loop(u64 cntrs)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-27 15:20 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
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 [this message]
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=ea33d2fa-6e69-4904-b5fd-ecec67e43352@intel.com \
--to=weijiang.yang@intel.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=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