From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E67BC43217 for ; Thu, 1 Dec 2022 16:48:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=DKRY1H0akWt9UQz/eBXUMUbhzR7jqFLdrTr+zT6fQww=; b=DKv8tSXwl3vvuv hd4jwopWMhLQ1HHDZC3OrtAfdu4uNBUuXp2GbCCQqxrXI60VXfctAyGyNtd66eg9BOgibMe5ni3b5 c1cKiARWq4UTpZJKCi4YHRaczdBZc8u6HCdaettbxrcA5bZN002Z9nZ8G3iQ87eTJTfVxoCyjdo56 UYfm3u3zhv5yYdoGFvhj7cgzXfFW6DB/z4BZsr+l6MPwSOBezrB+y3tur9pGMyCIT04ooqsTyrmaj qC2aE/aCGQpe8ensuKasbvSi4bxe9fj2rwRSdTpElqjeBvibU0jw8k/gFUTIH9h4qJ4bqnq4vibkC gWq49s3N7oGFKKJXSEOg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1p0mj6-008g9u-Sg; Thu, 01 Dec 2022 16:47:57 +0000 Received: from mail-pj1-x1036.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1036]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1p0mj3-008g8R-Rk for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2022 16:47:55 +0000 Received: by mail-pj1-x1036.google.com with SMTP id o12so2367995pjo.4 for ; Thu, 01 Dec 2022 08:47:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oiPlfSphC7yJwjzyONiuPHRaJCv76fAx56UNQh41g3U=; b=aaSEEL1+r4eJA9s7O/txHL7Xi6SeBXxCYU48kQub2FzkoNiCQgY/eKMqO5OpiGzNkd 1fgcRFsW0Q8Eus37xwWj3KdJkf/nkdAn7deQM9A3unixyBBmCtnk4ItrX5zmkqeauV7Z EHSxi6t3xV9JTzBKEe6qyUH3nU5jd8scAngXmGxbO4kHLXLzwd7eMIA1U+m6io8/hlIA inkGF5zxjhY3WjorcUncv5WMH8ppC3yRqxudwsfmA3Vd8bdpGI39pdI3xbMqZhlJ9Dae qoVrUQ5fNhLvFb2qSkC+7WLtct4Cl639VfIpdiNSV+VUkVIZJmLINY9wkDpQ16j8PGnQ DUMg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=oiPlfSphC7yJwjzyONiuPHRaJCv76fAx56UNQh41g3U=; b=OA6B4Xm0jYWBAYqJ2oADZ3lvEuVbi7KEofVLphHoJuQCE/cG0Gv10+POs9xQ7SI9GO gh9rXIDJi1rXH0J074yeW8xpJQB3a6QDbaGSRr0EOafYpJ8id4uwYw+p5noEPL+y2Era +t+5WlR0WgFHhJNwWz6AwBe2VvUm9za/FXrABk4lnzmw3o8KgIbOqx7+qNwFb6PxSaxy v7bB+9GRam4xX26Od95JYXvA6YFK/yrRasQK/xIWN1z1dgTWpC1+nBHcYmCRx5GfnXEm ehPt+e5Lj7vpOpacBiiU21XUp+kcqVsg5vwPOkFkZPOBa36OrBVFQ04pYC9V8FyiOzU4 mNGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pkHZ6oimW7pPsM+CQpsej5rzJ+nMn+LJojiUFWy3PJglM1NZv6M ZeNzGk2gs8t0kOoSFQ1rsEYRTQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf53wGa2uc6DutJAhGFjA4M2t8L/aNqHRIlBg+n5iB0HMiUkSRxe6etbVweNGGfkPbg13GSeTw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:4e41:b0:218:a971:d847 with SMTP id t1-20020a17090a4e4100b00218a971d847mr56219004pjl.91.1669913271049; Thu, 01 Dec 2022 08:47:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (220.181.82.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.82.181.220]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g6-20020a63fa46000000b0046f469a2661sm2751612pgk.27.2022.12.01.08.47.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 01 Dec 2022 08:47:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2022 08:47:47 -0800 From: Ricardo Koller To: Marc Zyngier Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org, James Morse , Suzuki K Poulose , Alexandru Elisei , Oliver Upton , Reiji Watanabe Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/16] KVM: arm64: PMU: Distinguish between 64bit counter and 64bit overflow Message-ID: References: <20221113163832.3154370-1-maz@kernel.org> <20221113163832.3154370-5-maz@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221113163832.3154370-5-maz@kernel.org> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20221201_084753_929104_8C4BFBC2 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 27.65 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 04:38:20PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > The PMU architecture makes a subtle difference between a 64bit > counter and a counter that has a 64bit overflow. This is for example > the case of the cycle counter, which can generate an overflow on > a 32bit boundary if PMCR_EL0.LC==0 despite the accumulation being > done on 64 bits. > > Use this distinction in the few cases where it matters in the code, > as we will reuse this with PMUv3p5 long counters. > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > --- > arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c > index 69b67ab3c4bf..d050143326b5 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c > @@ -50,6 +50,11 @@ static u32 kvm_pmu_event_mask(struct kvm *kvm) > * @select_idx: The counter index > */ > static bool kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx) > +{ > + return (select_idx == ARMV8_PMU_CYCLE_IDX); > +} > + > +static bool kvm_pmu_idx_has_64bit_overflow(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx) > { > return (select_idx == ARMV8_PMU_CYCLE_IDX && > __vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) & ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_LC); > @@ -57,7 +62,8 @@ static bool kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx) > > static bool kvm_pmu_counter_can_chain(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 idx) > { > - return (!(idx & 1) && (idx + 1) < ARMV8_PMU_CYCLE_IDX); > + return (!(idx & 1) && (idx + 1) < ARMV8_PMU_CYCLE_IDX && > + !kvm_pmu_idx_has_64bit_overflow(vcpu, idx)); > } > > static struct kvm_vcpu *kvm_pmc_to_vcpu(struct kvm_pmc *pmc) > @@ -97,7 +103,7 @@ u64 kvm_pmu_get_counter_value(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx) > counter += perf_event_read_value(pmc->perf_event, &enabled, > &running); > > - if (select_idx != ARMV8_PMU_CYCLE_IDX) > + if (!kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(vcpu, select_idx)) > counter = lower_32_bits(counter); > > return counter; > @@ -423,6 +429,23 @@ static void kvm_pmu_counter_increment(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > } > } > > +/* Compute the sample period for a given counter value */ > +static u64 compute_period(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx, u64 counter) > +{ > + u64 val; > + > + if (kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(vcpu, select_idx)) { > + if (!kvm_pmu_idx_has_64bit_overflow(vcpu, select_idx)) > + val = -(counter & GENMASK(31, 0)); If I understand things correctly, this might be missing another mask: + if (!kvm_pmu_idx_has_64bit_overflow(vcpu, select_idx)) { + val = -(counter & GENMASK(31, 0)); + val &= GENMASK(31, 0); + } else { For example, if the counter is 64-bits wide, it overflows at 32-bits, and it is _one_ sample away from overflowing at 32-bits: 0x01010101_ffffffff Then "val = (-counter) & GENMASK(63, 0)" would return 0xffffffff_00000001. But the right period is 0x00000000_00000001 (it's one sample away from overflowing). > + else > + val = (-counter) & GENMASK(63, 0); > + } else { > + val = (-counter) & GENMASK(31, 0); > + } > + > + return val; > +} > + > /** > * When the perf event overflows, set the overflow status and inform the vcpu. > */ > @@ -442,10 +465,7 @@ static void kvm_pmu_perf_overflow(struct perf_event *perf_event, > * Reset the sample period to the architectural limit, > * i.e. the point where the counter overflows. > */ > - period = -(local64_read(&perf_event->count)); > - > - if (!kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(vcpu, pmc->idx)) > - period &= GENMASK(31, 0); > + period = compute_period(vcpu, idx, local64_read(&perf_event->count)); > > local64_set(&perf_event->hw.period_left, 0); > perf_event->attr.sample_period = period; > @@ -571,14 +591,13 @@ static void kvm_pmu_create_perf_event(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx) > > /* > * If counting with a 64bit counter, advertise it to the perf > - * code, carefully dealing with the initial sample period. > + * code, carefully dealing with the initial sample period > + * which also depends on the overflow. > */ > - if (kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(vcpu, select_idx)) { > + if (kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(vcpu, select_idx)) > attr.config1 |= PERF_ATTR_CFG1_COUNTER_64BIT; > - attr.sample_period = (-counter) & GENMASK(63, 0); > - } else { > - attr.sample_period = (-counter) & GENMASK(31, 0); > - } > + > + attr.sample_period = compute_period(vcpu, select_idx, counter); > > event = perf_event_create_kernel_counter(&attr, -1, current, > kvm_pmu_perf_overflow, pmc); > -- > 2.34.1 > > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel