From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Imre Palik <imrep.amz@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Palik, Imre" <imrep@amazon.de>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf: honoring cpuid for number of fixed counters
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 10:36:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150603083615.GZ3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1433318628-6330-1-git-send-email-imrep.amz@gmail.com>
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 10:03:48AM +0200, Imre Palik wrote:
> From: "Palik, Imre" <imrep@amazon.de>
>
> perf doesn't seem to honor the number of fixed counters specified by cpuid
> leaf 0xa. It always assume that intel CPUs have at least 3 fixed counters.
>
> So if some of the fixed counters are masked out by the hypervisor, it still
> tries to check/set them. This is good for testing the masking code in the
> hypervisor, but not so nice otherwise.
>
> This patch makes perf pehave somewhat nicer when the number of fixed
> counters is less than three.
> @@ -3042,13 +3042,6 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
>
> x86_pmu.max_pebs_events = min_t(unsigned, MAX_PEBS_EVENTS, x86_pmu.num_counters);
>
> - /*
> - * Quirk: v2 perfmon does not report fixed-purpose events, so
> - * assume at least 3 events:
> - */
> - if (version > 1)
> - x86_pmu.num_counters_fixed = max((int)edx.split.num_counters_fixed, 3);
> -
> if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PDCM)) {
> u64 capabilities;
So the problem is that there is real hardware out there that gets the
CPUID stuff wrong, and this patch penalizes that by then not using the
fixed counters.
Further, the Intel Arch PerfMon v2 spec actually specifies there to be 3
fixed function counters.
So anything that says it is v2+ and does not have the 3, is non
compliant.
I would suggest you go fix your hypervisor.
Lacking that option; you could probe the MSRs to see if they're really
there using wrmsr_safe() or something like that -- see
check_hw_exists().
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-03 8:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-03 8:03 [RFC PATCH] perf: honoring cpuid for number of fixed counters Imre Palik
2015-06-03 8:36 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-06-04 10:35 ` Imre Palik
2015-06-04 11:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-04 12:30 ` Imre Palik
2015-06-04 13:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-05 13:02 ` Imre Palik
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=20150603083615.GZ3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=aliguori@amazon.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=imrep.amz@gmail.com \
--cc=imrep@amazon.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@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