From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] perf, x86: Add INST_RETIRED.ALL workarounds
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 11:19:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150323101935.GD23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150323093854.GA24993@gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:38:54AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
>
> > From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
> >
> > On Broadwell INST_RETIRED.ALL cannot be used with any period
> > that doesn't have the lowest 6 bits cleared. And the period
> > should not be smaller than 128.
>
> Sloppy changelog: a most basic question is not answered by the
> changelog: what happens in practice when the period is set to a
> smaller value than 128?
http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/5th-gen-core-family-spec-update.pdf
BDM11 and BDM55 (not 57) tell us that the PMU will generate crap output
if you don't do this. Non-fatal but gibberish.
> > +/*
> > + * Broadwell:
> > + * The INST_RETIRED.ALL period always needs to have lowest
> > + * 6bits cleared (BDM57). It shall not use a period smaller
> > + * than 100 (BDM11). We combine the two to enforce
> > + * a min-period of 128.
> > + */
>
> Sloppy comment: that's not what we do:
>
> > +static unsigned bdw_limit_period(struct perf_event *event, unsigned left)
> > +{
> > + if ((event->hw.config & INTEL_ARCH_EVENT_MASK) ==
> > + X86_CONFIG(.event=0xc0, .umask=0x01)) {
> > + if (left < 128)
> > + left = 128;
> > + left &= ~0x3fu;
> > + }
> > + return left;
>
> We enforce a minimum period of 128 and round the requested period to
> 64.
Not quite, we enforce a min period of 128 but otherwise mask bit0-5, no
rounding up.
Which is pretty much what the comment says.
> I think in this case it would be useful to tooling if we updated the
> syscall attribute with the real period value that was used, to not
> skew tooling output.
Seeing how we already have a fuzz of up to sample_period events; we
don't know how far into the last period we are when we stop the event,
it might have been 1 event away from generating a PMI, this patch
doesn't actually add significantly to that.
Also, the effective period is the one specified, if the requested period
< 128 we simply reject the event creation. If its any larger we iterate
around the requested sample period with steps of 64 but such that we
average out on the requested period. There is no 'real' period to copy
back.
Another way to look at this is that we use a form of pulse density
modulation to create the desired period using the larger step size; or
perhaps compare it to Breshenham's line drawing algorithm.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-23 10:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-18 2:18 [PATCH 1/3] perf, x86: Add new cache events table for Haswell Andi Kleen
2015-02-18 2:18 ` [PATCH 2/3] perf, x86: Add Broadwell core support Andi Kleen
2015-03-27 11:39 ` [tip:perf/core] perf/x86/intel: " tip-bot for Andi Kleen
2015-02-18 2:18 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf, x86: Add INST_RETIRED.ALL workarounds Andi Kleen
2015-03-23 9:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-23 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-03-23 10:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-23 12:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-03-23 13:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-27 11:39 ` [tip:perf/core] perf/x86/intel: " tip-bot for Andi Kleen
2015-03-23 9:45 ` [PATCH 1/3] perf, x86: Add new cache events table for Haswell Ingo Molnar
2015-03-23 13:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-03-23 13:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-27 11:39 ` [tip:perf/core] perf/x86/intel: " tip-bot for Andi Kleen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-02-11 0:40 [PATCH 1/3] perf, x86: " Andi Kleen
2015-02-11 0:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf, x86: Add INST_RETIRED.ALL workarounds Andi Kleen
2015-02-09 19:17 [PATCH 1/3] perf, x86: Add new cache events table for Haswell Andi Kleen
2015-02-09 19:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf, x86: Add INST_RETIRED.ALL workarounds Andi Kleen
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=20150323101935.GD23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@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