From: Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Borislav Petkov" <bp@suse.de>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@amacapital.net>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Robert Richter" <rric@kernel.org>,
"Jacob Shin" <jacob.w.shin@gmail.com>,
"John Stultz" <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
"Fr�d�ric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, spg_linux_kernel@amd.com,
x86@kernel.org, "Guenter Roeck" <linux@roeck-us.net>,
"Andreas Herrmann" <herrmann.der.user@googlemail.com>,
"Suravee Suthikulpanit" <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
"Aravind Gopalakrishnan" <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
"Fengguang Wu" <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
"Aaron Lu" <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] perf/x86/amd/power: Add AMD accumulated power reporting mechanism
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 22:42:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160121144233.GA16294@hr-amur2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160121090257.GC6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:02:57AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 03:04:38PM +0800, Huang Rui wrote:
> > I just quickly looked at about the spinlock on -rt mode. Because
> > realtime linux kernel provides two kinds of spinlock, the original
> > spinlock_t will be replaced the one which is able to sleep, actually,
> > like mutex. And another one (you mentioned here, raw_spinlock_t) can
> > keep on non-sleep behavior, that is the real spinlock.
> >
> > And my lock here also will be nested under perf_event_context::lock,
> > right?
>
> Yep.
>
> > > I have a lockdep patch somewhere that checks these ordering things; I
> > > should rebase and post that again.
> > >
> >
> > Can you CC me when you post that patch next time?
>
> Sure.
>
> > > One should not use GFP_ATOMIC if at all possible, also no, -rt cannot do
> > > _any_ allocations from this site.
> > >
> >
> > OK, that's because allocation might sleep when IRQ disabled. That's
> > incorrect.
>
> Right.
>
> Its related to the above, the allocator locks are spinlock_t and as a
> consequence of them becoming a blocking lock, spin_lock_irq() will also
> no longer disable IRQs.
>
> The CPU_STARTING notifier however will still be called with IRQs
> disabled because it is CPU bringup.
>
> So on -rt even GFP_ATOMIC will no longer work here.
>
OK, thanks to clarify it.
> > I draft an update diff that based on original patch, please take a
> > look.
> >
> > 8<--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd_power.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd_power.c
> > index 69ef234..e71d993 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd_power.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd_power.c
> > @@ -46,10 +46,17 @@ static unsigned int cu_num;
> > static u64 max_cu_acc_power;
> >
> > struct power_pmu {
> > - spinlock_t lock;
> > + raw_spinlock_t lock;
> > struct list_head active_list;
> > struct pmu *pmu; /* pointer to power_pmu_class */
> > local64_t cpu_sw_pwr_ptsc;
> > + /*
> > + * These two cpumasks is used for avoiding the allocations on
> > + * CPU_STARTING phase. Because power_cpu_prepare will be
> > + * called on IRQs disabled status.
> > + */
> > + cpumask_var_t mask;
> > + cpumask_var_t tmp_mask;
> > };
> >
> > static struct pmu pmu_class;
> > @@ -126,9 +133,9 @@ static void pmu_event_start(struct perf_event *event, int mode)
> > struct power_pmu *pmu = __this_cpu_read(amd_power_pmu);
> > unsigned long flags;
> >
> > - spin_lock_irqsave(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > __pmu_event_start(pmu, event);
> > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > }
> >
> > static void pmu_event_stop(struct perf_event *event, int mode)
> > @@ -137,7 +144,7 @@ static void pmu_event_stop(struct perf_event *event, int mode)
> > struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
> > unsigned long flags;
> >
> > - spin_lock_irqsave(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pmu->lock, flags);
> >
> > /* mark event as deactivated and stopped */
> > if (!(hwc->state & PERF_HES_STOPPED)) {
> > @@ -155,7 +162,7 @@ static void pmu_event_stop(struct perf_event *event, int mode)
> > hwc->state |= PERF_HES_UPTODATE;
> > }
> >
> > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > }
> >
> > static int pmu_event_add(struct perf_event *event, int mode)
> > @@ -164,14 +171,14 @@ static int pmu_event_add(struct perf_event *event, int mode)
> > struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
> > unsigned long flags;
> >
> > - spin_lock_irqsave(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&pmu->lock, flags);
> >
> > hwc->state = PERF_HES_UPTODATE | PERF_HES_STOPPED;
> >
> > if (mode & PERF_EF_START)
> > __pmu_event_start(pmu, event);
> >
> > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmu->lock, flags);
> > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pmu->lock, flags);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
>
> So for these 4 {start,stop,add,del} you can drop the irqsave/irqrestore
> thing as its guaranteed that IRQs will be disabled.
>
OK, I will remove the lock.
> > + cpumask_clear(pmu->mask);
> > + cpumask_clear(pmu->tmp_mask);
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < cores_per_cu; i++)
> > + cpumask_set_cpu(i, pmu->mask);
> >
> > + cpumask_shift_left(pmu->mask, pmu->mask, cu * cores_per_cu);
>
> Couldn't you simply use topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu) instead?
>
Looks like we couldn't. That's because cores number per cu (compute
unit) is got by CPUID 0x8000001e EBX. That relies on the CPU hardware.
> >
> > static int power_cpu_init(int cpu)
> > {
> > + struct power_pmu *pmu = per_cpu(amd_power_pmu, cpu);
> > + int i, cu;
> >
> > + if (pmu)
> > + return 0;
> >
> > + cu = cpu / cores_per_cu;
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < cores_per_cu; i++)
> > + cpumask_set_cpu(i, pmu->mask);
> >
> > + cpumask_shift_left(pmu->mask, pmu->mask, cu * cores_per_cu);
>
> topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu) again?
>
Ditto.
Thanks,
Rui
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-21 14:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-14 2:50 [PATCH v2 0/5] perf/x86/power: Introduce AMD accumlated power reporting mechanism Huang Rui
2016-01-14 2:50 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] x86/amd: move nodes_per_socket into bsp_init_amd Huang Rui
2016-03-21 9:54 ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf/x86/amd: Move nodes_per_socket into bsp_init_amd() tip-bot for Huang Rui
2016-01-14 2:50 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] x86/amd: add accessor for number of cores per compute unit Huang Rui
2016-01-14 2:50 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] x86/cpufeature: add AMD Accumulated Power Mechanism feature flag Huang Rui
2016-03-21 9:55 ` [tip:perf/urgent] x86/cpufeature, perf/x86: Add " tip-bot for Huang Rui
2016-01-14 2:50 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] perf/x86: Move events_sysfs_show outside CPU_SUP_INTEL Huang Rui
2016-01-14 2:50 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] perf/x86/amd/power: Add AMD accumulated power reporting mechanism Huang Rui
2016-01-19 12:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-20 4:48 ` Huang Rui
2016-01-20 9:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 7:04 ` Huang Rui
2016-01-21 9:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 14:42 ` Huang Rui [this message]
2016-01-21 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 15:24 ` Huang Rui
2016-01-21 15:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-21 16:59 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-22 8:04 ` Huang Rui
2016-01-22 17:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-14 6:01 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] perf/x86/power: Introduce AMD accumlated " Borislav Petkov
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=20160121144233.GA16294@hr-amur2 \
--to=ray.huang@amd.com \
--cc=Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=herrmann.der.user@googlemail.com \
--cc=jacob.w.shin@gmail.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rric@kernel.org \
--cc=spg_linux_kernel@amd.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--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