From: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
To: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Fixing chained events, and PMUv3p5 support
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:55:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YvQpN3SYePyTw13z@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YvQIIWnUkCGl9Ltp@google.com>
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 02:33:53PM -0500, Oliver Upton wrote:
> Hi Ricardo,
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 11:46:22AM -0700, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 02:58:04PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > Ricardo recently reported[1] that our PMU emulation was busted when it
> > > comes to chained events, as we cannot expose the overflow on a 32bit
> > > boundary (which the architecture requires).
> > >
> > > This series aims at fixing this (by deleting a lot of code), and as a
> > > bonus adds support for PMUv3p5, as this requires us to fix a few more
> > > things.
> > >
> > > Tested on A53 (PMUv3) and FVP (PMUv3p5).
> > >
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220805004139.990531-1-ricarkol@google.com
> > >
> > > Marc Zyngier (9):
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Align chained counter implementation with
> > > architecture pseudocode
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Distinguish between 64bit counter and 64bit overflow
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Only narrow counters that are not 64bit wide
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Add counter_index_to_*reg() helpers
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Simplify setting a counter to a specific value
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Move the ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUver limit to VM creation
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Aleven ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUver to be set from userspace
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Implement PMUv3p5 long counter support
> > > KVM: arm64: PMU: Aleven PMUv3p5 to be exposed to the guest
> > >
> > > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
> > > arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c | 6 +
> > > arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c | 372 ++++++++++--------------------
> > > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 65 +++++-
> > > include/kvm/arm_pmu.h | 16 +-
> > > 5 files changed, 208 insertions(+), 252 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
> > >
> >
> > Hi Marc,
> >
> > There is one extra potential issue with exposing PMUv3p5. I see this
> > weird behavior when doing passthrough ("bare metal") on the fast-model
> > configured to emulate PMUv3p5: the [63:32] half of the counters
> > overflowing at 32-bits is still incremented.
> >
> > Fast model - ARMv8.5:
> >
> > Assuming the initial state is even=0xFFFFFFFF and odd=0x0,
> > incrementing the even counter leads to:
> >
> > 0x00000001_00000000 0x00000000_00000001 0x1
> > even counter odd counter PMOVSET
> >
> > Assuming the initial state is even=0xFFFFFFFF and odd=0xFFFFFFFF,
> > incrementing the even counter leads to:
> >
> > 0x00000001_00000000 0x00000001_00000000 0x3
> > even counter odd counter PMOVSET
>
> This is to be expected, actually. PMUv8p5 counters are always 64 bit,
> regardless of the configured overflow.
>
> DDI 0487H D8.3 Behavior on overflow
>
> If FEAT_PMUv3p5 is implemented, 64-bit event counters are implemented,
> HDCR.HPMN is not 0, and either n is in the range [0 .. (HDCR.HPMN-1)]
> or EL2 is not implemented, then event counter overflow is configured
> by PMCR.LP:
>
> — When PMCR.LP is set to 0, if incrementing PMEVCNTR<n> causes an unsigned
> overflow of bits [31:0] of the event counter, the PE sets PMOVSCLR[n] to 1.
> — When PMCR.LP is set to 1, if incrementing PMEVCNTR<n> causes an unsigned
> overflow of bits [63:0] of the event counter, the PE sets PMOVSCLR[n] to 1.
>
> [...]
>
> For all 64-bit counters, incrementing the counter is the same whether an
> unsigned overflow occurs at [31:0] or [63:0]. If the counter increments
> for an event, bits [63:0] are always incremented.
>
> Do you see this same (expected) failure w/ Marc's series?
I don't know, I'm hitting another bug it seems.
Just realized that KVM does not offer PMUv3p5 (with this series applied)
when the real hardware is only Armv8.2 (the setup I originally tried).
So, tried these other two setups on the fast model:
has_arm_v8-5=1
# ./lkvm-static run --nodefaults --pmu pmu.flat -p pmu-chained-sw-incr
# lkvm run -k pmu.flat -m 704 -c 8 --name guest-135
INFO: PMU version: 0x6
^^^
PMUv3 for Armv8.5
INFO: PMU implementer/ID code: 0x41("A")/0
INFO: Implements 8 event counters
FAIL: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: overflow and chain counter incremented after 100 SW_INCR/CHAIN
INFO: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: overflow=0x0, #0=4294967380 #1=0
^^^
no overflows
FAIL: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: expected overflows and values after 100 SW_INCR/CHAIN
INFO: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: overflow=0x0, #0=84 #1=-1
INFO: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: overflow=0x0, #0=4294967380 #1=4294967295
SUMMARY: 2 tests, 2 unexpected failures
has_arm_v8-2=1
# ./lkvm-static run --nodefaults --pmu pmu.flat -p pmu-chained-sw-incr
# lkvm run -k pmu.flat -m 704 -c 8 --name guest-134
INFO: PMU version: 0x4
^^^
PMUv3 for Armv8.1
INFO: PMU implementer/ID code: 0x41("A")/0
INFO: Implements 8 event counters
PASS: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: overflow and chain counter incremented after 100 SW_INCR/CHAIN
INFO: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: overflow=0x1, #0=84 #1=1
PASS: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: expected overflows and values after 100 SW_INCR/CHAIN
INFO: pmu: pmu-chained-sw-incr: overflow=0x3, #0=84 #1=0
SUMMARY: 2 tests
The Armv8.2 case is working as expected, but the Armv8.5 one is not.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Oliver
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-10 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-05 13:58 [PATCH 0/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Fixing chained events, and PMUv3p5 support Marc Zyngier
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 1/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Align chained counter implementation with architecture pseudocode Marc Zyngier
2022-08-10 17:21 ` Oliver Upton
2022-08-23 4:30 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-10-24 10:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-10-27 14:33 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-10-27 15:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 2/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Distinguish between 64bit counter and 64bit overflow Marc Zyngier
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 3/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Only narrow counters that are not 64bit wide Marc Zyngier
2022-08-24 4:07 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 4/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Add counter_index_to_*reg() helpers Marc Zyngier
2022-08-10 7:17 ` Oliver Upton
2022-08-10 17:23 ` Oliver Upton
2022-08-24 4:27 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 5/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Simplify setting a counter to a specific value Marc Zyngier
2022-08-10 15:41 ` Oliver Upton
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 6/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Move the ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUver limit to VM creation Marc Zyngier
2022-08-26 4:34 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-08-26 6:02 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-10-26 14:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-10-27 16:09 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-10-27 17:24 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 7/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Allow ID_AA64DFR0_EL1.PMUver to be set from userspace Marc Zyngier
2022-08-10 7:08 ` Oliver Upton
2022-08-10 9:27 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-08-26 7:01 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 8/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Implement PMUv3p5 long counter support Marc Zyngier
2022-08-10 7:16 ` Oliver Upton
2022-08-10 9:28 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-08-27 7:09 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-08-05 13:58 ` [PATCH 9/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Allow PMUv3p5 to be exposed to the guest Marc Zyngier
2022-08-10 7:16 ` Oliver Upton
2022-08-10 18:46 ` [PATCH 0/9] KVM: arm64: PMU: Fixing chained events, and PMUv3p5 support Ricardo Koller
2022-08-10 19:33 ` Oliver Upton
2022-08-10 21:55 ` Ricardo Koller [this message]
2022-08-11 12:56 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-08-12 22:53 ` Ricardo Koller
2022-10-24 18:05 ` Marc Zyngier
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=YvQpN3SYePyTw13z@google.com \
--to=ricarkol@google.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.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).