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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EB32C04AA7 for ; Mon, 13 May 2019 11:12:26 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5615208CA for ; Mon, 13 May 2019 11:12:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="i+2vg1NY" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E5615208CA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description :Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=VBI4zulzTovEkiek/wBQkEzMnmikqL1SniexOKzhENk=; b=i+2vg1NYnpjYpk 76luDKZ/HjtE+ZiZpWOuilppUt8OZIlyrnJmzior57e5D9SKeCuad592xoyVcb30f9MaUpYKo23RH 3g6ZS2V151BcmBGMWsdmjNqa9Qj8tOpIusa33/mftewH/zwgcRGJhdImntCOaePYpZq6a9U+q475J XGhktrtZ3Vqb4kErrcqYVeWyBesrBW4jYRul2X1AxAk6Wb4lJdAk5R9xgbx8PumPfAKZI8KH2M9o/ Zmfvahk+8tlhGIR6ThNqyhW0YiZndTtL6A3mUlsFoly3Uj+dsZ/kXH4s7c+RBNp34I1hYZLCTN28i AOMof3FjmwvxLzhuuWog==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hQ8sW-0007tD-Hs; Mon, 13 May 2019 11:12:20 +0000 Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.35] helo=huawei.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hQ8sS-0007rh-RV for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 13 May 2019 11:12:18 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS412-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 2AE843B18879504E3740; Mon, 13 May 2019 19:12:06 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.177.223.23) by DGGEMS412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.212) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.439.0; Mon, 13 May 2019 19:11:57 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] arm64: SPE ACPI enablement To: Sudeep Holla , Will Deacon References: <20190503232407.37195-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <5eaa1607-4bf0-a320-e9cf-2d51eca912c6@huawei.com> <82032e5b-0cb5-e48f-ab51-ba5d5f9dceec@arm.com> <819de863-92ff-51c5-9c35-880db4f6a922@huawei.com> <20190508165149.GB21553@e107155-lin> <20190509092810.GC2667@brain-police> <20190509103559.GB8239@e107155-lin> From: Hanjun Guo Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 19:10:56 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190509103559.GB8239@e107155-lin> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.177.223.23] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190513_041217_114932_BB128AAB X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 18.32 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, Alexander Shishkin , catalin.marinas@arm.com, john.garry@huawei.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, linuxarm@huawei.com, Jeremy Linton , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Hongbo Yao , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lenb@kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 2019/5/9 18:35, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 10:28:11AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: >> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 05:51:49PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 05:35:51PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: [...] >>>>>> >>>>>> Adding this patch set on top of latest mainline kernel, >>>>>> and tested on D06 which has the SPE feature, in boot message >>>>>> shows it was probed successfully: >>>>>> >>>>>> arm_spe_pmu arm,spe-v1: probed for CPUs 0-95 [max_record_sz 128, align 4, features 0x7] >>>>>> >>>>>> but when I test it with spe events such as >>>>>> >>>>>> perf record -c 1024 -e arm_spe_0/branch_filter=0/ -o spe ls >>>>>> >>>>>> it fails with: >>>>>> failed to mmap with 12 (Cannot allocate memory), >>>>>> >>>>>> Confirmed that patch [0] is merged and other perf events are working >>>>>> fine. >>>>> >>>>> Its pretty easy to get into the weeds with this driver, does it work with examples like: >>>>> >>>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/14/122 >>>> >>>> No, not work at all. >>>> >>>> SPE works on 5.0, but not work after 5.1-rc1, bisected to this commit: >>>> >>>> 5768402fd9c6 perf/ring_buffer: Use high order allocations for AUX buffers optimistically >>>> >>> >>> Indeed this patch breaks SPE. As mentioned in the patch, it uses high >>> order allocations for AUX buffers and SPE PMU setup_aux explicitly >>> fails with the warning "unexpected high-order page for auxbuf!" if >>> it encounters one. >>> >>> I don't know the intention of that check in SPE. Will ? >> >> Since SPE uses virtual addressing, we don't really care about the underlying >> page layout so there's no need to use higher-order allocations. I suppose we >> could theoretically map them at the pmd level in some cases, but ignoring >> them should also be harmless and I suspect you can delete the check. >> > > Yes, I did a quick look to see if we can do that, but couldn't find a clue. > Not sure if that's any optimisation, we can use order from page_private > and set the values accordingly ? > >> Does the patch below fix the problem? >> > > Yes it should help, I tried exactly the same thing yesterday and it does > fix the issue. Works for me too, thank you Sudeep and Will for looking into this issue. Best Regards Hanjun _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel