linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] arm64/perf: Basic uncore counter support for Cavium ThunderX
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 15:07:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160215140720.GA4053@hardcore> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160212173658.GD20262@leverpostej>

Hi Mark,

thanks for reviewing! I'll need several mails to address all questions.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 05:36:59PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 05:55:06PM +0100, Jan Glauber wrote:
> > Provide uncore facilities for non-CPU performance counter units.
> > Based on Intel/AMD uncore pmu support.
> > 
> > The uncore PMUs can be found under /sys/bus/event_source/devices.
> > All counters are exported via sysfs in the corresponding events
> > files under the PMU directory so the perf tool can list the event names.
> 
> It turns out that "uncore" covers quite a lot of things.
> 
> Where exactly do the see counters live? system, socket, cluster?

Neither cluster nor socket, so I would say system. Where a system may
consist of 2 nodes that mostly appear as one system.

> Are there potentially multiple instances of a given PMU in the system?
> e.g. might each clutster have an instance of an L2 PMU?

Yes.

> If I turn off a set of CPUs, do any "uncore" PMUs lost context or become
> inaccessible?

No, they are not related to CPUs.

[...]

> > 
> > 1) The PMU detection solely relies on PCI device detection. If a
> >    matching PCI device is found the PMU is created. The code can deal
> >    with multiple units of the same type, e.g. more than one memory
> >    controller.
> 
> I see below that the driver has an initcall that runs regardless of
> whether the PCI device exists, and looks at the MIDR. That's clearly not
> string PCI device detection.
> 
> Why is this not a true PCI driver that only gets probed if the PCI
> device exists? 

It is not a PCI driver because there are already drivers like edac that
will access these PCI devices. The uncore driver only accesses the
performance counters, which are not used by the other drivers.

[...]

> > +#include <asm/cpufeature.h>
> > +#include <asm/cputype.h>
> 
> I don't see why you should need these two if this is truly an uncore
> device probed solely from PCI.

There are several passes of the hardware that have the same PCI device
ID. Therefore I need the CPU variant to distinguish them. This could
be done _after_ the PCI device is found but I found it easier to
implement the check once in the common setup function.

[...]

> > +int thunder_uncore_event_init(struct perf_event *event)
> > +{
> > +	struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
> > +	struct thunder_uncore *uncore;
> > +
> > +	if (event->attr.type != event->pmu->type)
> > +		return -ENOENT;
> > +
> > +	/* we do not support sampling */
> > +	if (is_sampling_event(event))
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +	/* counters do not have these bits */
> > +	if (event->attr.exclude_user	||
> > +	    event->attr.exclude_kernel	||
> > +	    event->attr.exclude_host	||
> > +	    event->attr.exclude_guest	||
> > +	    event->attr.exclude_hv	||
> > +	    event->attr.exclude_idle)
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> 
> We should _really_ make these features opt-in at the core level. It's
> crazy that each and every PMU drivers has to explicitly test and reject
> things it doesn't support.

Completely agreed. Also, every sample code I looked at did
check for other bits...

[...]

> > +
> > +	uncore = event_to_thunder_uncore(event);
> > +	if (!uncore)
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +	if (!uncore->event_valid(event->attr.config))
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +	hwc->config = event->attr.config;
> > +	hwc->idx = -1;
> > +
> > +	/* and we don't care about CPU */
> 
> Actually, you do. You want the perf core to serialize accesses via the
> same CPU, so all events _must_ be targetted at the same CPU. Otherwise
> there are a tonne of problems you don't even want to think about.

I found that perf added the events on every CPU in the system. Because
the uncore events are not CPU related I wanted to avoid this. Setting
cpumask to -1 did not work. Therefore I added a single CPU in the
cpumask, see thunder_uncore_attr_show_cpumask().

> You _must_ ensure this kernel-side, regardless of what the perf tool
> happens to do.
> 
> See the arm-cci and arm-ccn drivers for an example.
> 
> You can also follow the migration approach used there to allow you to
> retain counting across a hotplug.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +static int __init thunder_uncore_init(void)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned long implementor = read_cpuid_implementor();
> > +	unsigned long part_number = read_cpuid_part_number();
> > +	u32 variant;
> > +
> > +	if (implementor != ARM_CPU_IMP_CAVIUM ||
> > +	    part_number != CAVIUM_CPU_PART_THUNDERX)
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +	/* detect pass2 which contains different counters */
> > +	variant = MIDR_VARIANT(read_cpuid_id());
> > +	if (variant == 1)
> > +		thunder_uncore_version = 1;
> > +	pr_info("PMU version: %d\n", thunder_uncore_version);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> 
> You should call out these differences in the commmit message.

OK

> Mark.

Thanks, Jan

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-02-15 14:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-12 16:55 [RFC PATCH 0/7] Cavium ThunderX uncore PMU support Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 1/7] arm64/perf: Basic uncore counter support for Cavium ThunderX Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 17:36   ` Mark Rutland
2016-02-13  1:47     ` David Daney
2016-02-15 11:33       ` Mark Rutland
2016-02-15 14:07     ` Jan Glauber [this message]
2016-02-15 14:27       ` Mark Rutland
2016-02-15 14:46         ` Mark Rutland
2016-02-15 15:34         ` Jan Glauber
2016-02-16  8:41     ` Jan Glauber
2016-03-11 10:54     ` Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 2/7] arm64/perf: Cavium ThunderX L2C TAD uncore support Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 3/7] arm64/perf: Cavium ThunderX L2C CBC " Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 4/7] arm64/perf: Cavium ThunderX LMC " Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 5/7] arm64/perf: Cavium ThunderX OCX LNE " Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 6/7] arm64/perf: Cavium ThunderX OCX FRC " Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 7/7] arm64/perf: Cavium ThunderX OCX TLK " Jan Glauber
2016-02-12 17:00 ` [RFC PATCH 0/7] Cavium ThunderX uncore PMU support Mark Rutland

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=20160215140720.GA4053@hardcore \
    --to=jan.glauber@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).