From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@huawei.com>
Cc: will@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
james.clark@linaro.org, robh@kernel.org,
anshuman.khandual@arm.com, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com,
hejunhao3@huawei.com, linuxarm@huawei.com,
prime.zeng@hisilicon.com, xuwei5@huawei.com,
wangyushan12@huawei.com, yangyicong@hisilicon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf: arm_pmuv3: Don't use PMCCNTR_EL0 on SMT cores
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:33:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJsYah_DGPIQ5v3-@J2N7QTR9R3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250812080830.20796-3-yangyicong@huawei.com>
On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 04:08:30PM +0800, Yicong Yang wrote:
> From: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@hisilicon.com>
>
> CPU_CYCLES is expected to count the logical CPU (PE) clock. Currently it's
> preferred to use PMCCNTR_EL0 for counting CPU_CYCLES, but it'll count
> processor clock rather than the PE clock (ARM DDI0487 L.b D13.1.3) if
> one of the SMT siblings is not idle on a multi-threaded implementation.
>
> So don't use it on SMT cores.
This is rather unfortunate.
When does this actually matter?
Per ARM DDI 0487 L.b, page D14-6918:
| If FEAT_PMUv3p9 is implemented, then CPU_CYCLES does not increment
| when the clocks are stopped by WFI and WFE instructions. Otherwise, it
| is CONSTRAINED UNPREDICTABLE whether or not CPU_CYCLES continues to
| increment when the clocks are stopped by WFI and WFE instructions.
... so prior to FEAT_PMUv3p9, no-one could rely on the difference
anyway.
> When counting cycles on SMT CPU 2-3 and CPU 3 is idle, without this
> patch we'll get:
> [root@client1 tmp]# perf stat -e cycles -A -C 2-3 -- stress-ng -c 1
> --taskset 2 --timeout 1
> [...]
> Performance counter stats for 'CPU(s) 2-3':
>
> CPU2 2880457316 cycles
> CPU3 2880459810 cycles
> 1.254688470 seconds time elapsed
>
> With this patch the idle state of CPU3 is observed as expected:
> [root@client1 ~]# perf stat -e cycles -A -C 2-3 -- stress-ng -c 1
> --taskset 2 --timeout 1
> [...]
> Performance counter stats for 'CPU(s) 2-3':
>
> CPU2 2558580492 cycles
> CPU3 305749 cycles
> 1.113626410 seconds time elapsed
>
> Signed-off-by: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@hisilicon.com>
> ---
> drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c
> index 95c899d07df5..ed3149632b71 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c
> @@ -1002,6 +1002,15 @@ static bool armv8pmu_can_use_pmccntr(struct pmu_hw_events *cpuc,
> if (has_branch_stack(event))
> return false;
>
> + /*
> + * The PMCCNTR_EL0 increments from the processor clock rather than
> + * the PE clock (ARM DDI0487 L.b D13.1.3) which means it'll continue
> + * counting on a WFI PE if one of its SMT silbing is not idle on a
> + * multi-threaded implementation. So don't use it on SMT cores.
> + */
> + if (cpumask_weight(topology_sibling_cpumask(smp_processor_id())) > 1)
> + return false;
This effectively forbids use of PMCCNTR_EL0 for any events.
Is there any existing event that it is useful for?
Mark.
> +
> return true;
> }
>
> --
> 2.24.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-12 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-12 8:08 [PATCH 0/2] perf: arm_pmuv3: Don't use PMCCNTR_EL0 on SMT cores Yicong Yang
2025-08-12 8:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf: arm_pmuv3: Factor out PMCCNTR_EL0 use conditions Yicong Yang
2025-08-12 10:02 ` James Clark
2025-08-12 10:25 ` Mark Rutland
2025-08-12 8:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf: arm_pmuv3: Don't use PMCCNTR_EL0 on SMT cores Yicong Yang
2025-08-12 10:00 ` James Clark
2025-08-12 10:14 ` Yicong Yang
2025-08-12 10:22 ` Mark Rutland
2025-08-13 8:17 ` Yicong Yang
2025-08-12 10:31 ` James Clark
2025-08-13 8:32 ` Yicong Yang
2025-08-12 10:33 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2025-08-13 8:03 ` Yicong Yang
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=aJsYah_DGPIQ5v3-@J2N7QTR9R3 \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=hejunhao3@huawei.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=prime.zeng@hisilicon.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=wangyushan12@huawei.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=xuwei5@huawei.com \
--cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.com \
--cc=yangyicong@huawei.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).