From: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
will@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] perf/cxl: Fix the counter overflow delta fixup
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 09:56:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51728f3b-e75d-4b63-a355-7d0b0398d0dc@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260729232142.050ed34c@jic23-huawei>
On 7/29/26 3:21 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 07:55:49 -0700
> Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com> wrote:
>
>> Counters are configured with Freeze on Overflow and are never reloaded: on
>> overflow the counter wraps to 0, counts on until the CPMU freezes, and
> Hi Dave,
>
> Thanks for looking at these.
>
> Why would it count on if it froze? I think the bot is tripping over the
> fact we don't yet implement free running counters (and the other bug
> about not unfreezing) for currently the ability to freeze on only some
> counters (to do periodic sampling for instance).
>
> The CXL CPMU spec is incredibly broad in what is supported, so maybe
> we want to harden things anyway but I'm not sure the condition described
> by most of this is real.
>
>> retains that residual (CXL r4.0 8.2.7.2.3). So the masked subtraction in
>> __cxl_pmu_read() only spans the wrap when new_cnt < prev_cnt.
>
> It's been a long time so maybe I have how this was meant to work wrong.
>
> There are two paths to __cxl_pmu_read()
>
> 1. We have freeze on overflow enabled so any counter that overflows results
> in an interrupt. At that point all counters are frozen.
> We then read only the counter that overflowed (which is 0) and that
> will update the prev_cnt storage. No chance of hitting the full wrap
> around seen here.
>
> 2. An on demand read (polling) In this case the counter may
> take any value, but because we have freeze on overflow it can't have
> wrapped (as otherwise we'd have taken path 1).
>
> So slightly fun question of why we have any wrapping control and I think
> the answer is because the freeze on overflow isn't very specific in the
> spec for whether it freezes on max value or 0.
Vague enough that hardware can freeze on overflow but leave greater than 0 value? Or is it always either max value or 0? If you don't think this patch is needed I can drop.
DJ
>
>
>>
>> The fixup keys off the delta rather than the operands:
>>
>> delta = (new_cnt - prev_cnt) & GENMASK_ULL(counter_width - 1, 0);
>> if (overflow && delta < GENMASK_ULL(counter_width - 1, 0))
>> delta += (1UL << counter_width);
>>
>> and is wrong both ways. After a mid-period read the subtraction already
>> spans the wrap, but the guard holds for all but one delta value, so a
>> second period is added and the event over-counts. After an earlier
>> overflow read - or after event_start(), which leaves prev_count at 0 -
>> prev_cnt is a small residual, and once the new residual is greater or
>> equal only the difference between the two is counted and the period is
>> lost, which for a residual of 0 means every period after the first.
>> 'perf stat -I' hits the former, plain 'perf stat' the latter.
>>
>> The shift is also undefined for counter_width == 64, and for >= 32 on
>> 32-bit kernels where 1UL is 32 bits.
>
> That bit seems valid.
>
>>
>> Condition the fixup on new_cnt >= prev_cnt, the one case the masked
>> subtraction cannot express, and use mask + 1 for the period: it is 0 for a
>> 64-bit counter, the correct sum mod 2^64, and needs no shift. A
>> userspace read landing between the wrap and the handler clearing the
>> overflow status stays correct because the counter is frozen and cannot
>> advance between the two reads.
>>
>> Fixes: 5d7107c72796 ("perf: CXL Performance Monitoring Unit driver")
>> Reported-by: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
>> Closes: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260715191454.459673-1-dave@stgolabs.net?part=1
>> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-8
>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
>> ---
>> v2:
>> - Fix the fixup instead of deleting it. v1 dropped it on the rationale
>> that the masked subtraction already handles the wrap, which only holds
>> for new_cnt < prev_cnt; with freeze on overflow and no reload the
>> overflow path routinely sees new_cnt >= prev_cnt, where v1 silently
>> dropped a full period (sashiko-bot,
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cxl/20260728211411.47B2D1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org/).
>> - Keep the overflow argument and the __cxl_pmu_read()/cxl_pmu_read()
>> split; v1 folded them together once the argument went unused.
>> - Use mask + 1 rather than 1ULL << counter_width so the 64-bit counter
>> case needs no special casing.
>> ---
>> drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c
>> index 3138514157cd..956da8202551 100644
>> --- a/drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c
>> @@ -690,7 +690,7 @@ static void __cxl_pmu_read(struct perf_event *event, bool overflow)
>> {
>> struct cxl_pmu_info *info = pmu_to_cxl_pmu_info(event->pmu);
>> struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
>> - u64 new_cnt, prev_cnt, delta;
>> + u64 new_cnt, prev_cnt, delta, mask;
>>
>> do {
>> prev_cnt = local64_read(&hwc->prev_count);
>> @@ -698,12 +698,18 @@ static void __cxl_pmu_read(struct perf_event *event, bool overflow)
>> } while (local64_cmpxchg(&hwc->prev_count, prev_cnt, new_cnt) != prev_cnt);
>>
>> /*
>> - * If we know an overflow occur then take that into account.
>> - * Note counter is not reset as that would lose events
>> + * The counter wraps to 0 and is never reloaded, so the masked unsigned
>> + * subtraction only recovers a wrap when new_cnt < prev_cnt. On the
>> + * overflow path new_cnt >= prev_cnt means the full period elapsed
>> + * (prev_cnt is 0 from event_start(), or the residual left by an earlier
>> + * overflow), so add the period back. mask + 1 is 2^counter_width, which
>> + * evaluates to 0 for a 64-bit counter - the correct sum mod 2^64, and
>> + * avoids the undefined 1 << 64.
>> */
>> - delta = (new_cnt - prev_cnt) & GENMASK_ULL(info->counter_width - 1, 0);
>> - if (overflow && delta < GENMASK_ULL(info->counter_width - 1, 0))
>> - delta += (1UL << info->counter_width);
>> + mask = GENMASK_ULL(info->counter_width - 1, 0);
>> + delta = (new_cnt - prev_cnt) & mask;
>> + if (overflow && new_cnt >= prev_cnt)
>> + delta += mask + 1;
>>
>> local64_add(delta, &event->count);
>> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-30 16:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-29 14:55 [PATCH v2 0/9] perf/cxlpmu: Misc sashiko raised issues fixes Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] perf/cxl: Program the requested event group on configurable counters Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 15:06 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 22:29 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 15:50 ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] perf/cxl: Clear stale event fields before reprogramming a counter Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 15:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 22:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 15:45 ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] perf/cxl: Fix the counter overflow delta fixup Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 15:13 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 22:21 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 16:56 ` Dave Jiang [this message]
2026-07-30 17:19 ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-30 19:00 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] perf/cxl: Accept an overflow interrupt on MSI message number 0 Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 19:28 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-29 19:59 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2026-07-30 12:18 ` Robin Murphy
2026-07-30 17:57 ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-30 18:57 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 21:32 ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] perf/cxl: Keep the overflow interrupt pinned to the managed CPU Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 15:23 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 19:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-29 20:27 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2026-07-30 11:46 ` Robin Murphy
2026-07-30 18:55 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 21:34 ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-30 22:19 ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] perf/cxl: Unfreeze counters after handling an overflow interrupt Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 19:24 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 12:04 ` Robin Murphy
2026-07-30 18:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 23:00 ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] perf/cxl: Validate the hardware-reported counter width Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 15:11 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 19:21 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] perf/cxl: Don't use pmu.dev in IRQ and hotplug callbacks after unregister Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 15:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 19:17 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 11:38 ` Robin Murphy
2026-07-30 18:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-29 14:55 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] perf/cxl: Avoid cpumask_of(-1) when no CPU is assigned Dave Jiang
2026-07-29 15:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 19:14 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-07-30 9:36 ` Robin Murphy
2026-07-31 0:11 ` Dave Jiang
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=51728f3b-e75d-4b63-a355-7d0b0398d0dc@intel.com \
--to=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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