From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
tonyj@suse.com, nelson.dsouza@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] perf/x86/intel: Fix memory corruption
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 12:05:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190319110549.GC5996@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABPqkBT9=XRLinbhA0T5iztM6NGd5fO39-kQoB5j3Evfvfh2yA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:29:25PM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> > @@ -3410,7 +3410,7 @@ tfa_get_event_constraints(struct cpu_hw_
> > /*
> > * Without TFA we must not use PMC3.
> > */
> > - if (!allow_tsx_force_abort && test_bit(3, c->idxmsk)) {
> > + if (!allow_tsx_force_abort && test_bit(3, c->idxmsk) && idx >= 0) {
> > c = dyn_constraint(cpuc, c, idx);
> > c->idxmsk64 &= ~(1ULL << 3);
> > c->weight--;
> >
> >
> I was not cc'd on the patch that added allow_tsx_force_abort, so I
Yeah, that never was public :-( I didn't particularly like that, but
that's the way it is.
> will give some comments here.
> If I understand the goal of the control parameter it is to turn on/off
> the TFA workaround and thus determine whether or not PMC3 is
> available. I don't know why you would need to make this a runtime
> tunable.
Not quite; the control on its own doesn't directly write the MSR. And
even when the work-around is allowed, we'll not set the MSR unless there
is also demand for PMC3.
It is a runtime tunable because boot parameters suck.
> That seems a bit dodgy. But given the code you have here right now, we
> have to deal with it. A sysadmin could flip the control at any time,
> including when PMC3 is already in used by some events. I do not see
> the code that schedules out all the events on all CPUs once PMC3
> becomes unavailable. You cannot just rely on the next context-switch
> or timer tick for multiplexing.
Yeah, meh. You're admin, you can 'fix' it. In practise I don't expect
most people to care about the knob, and the few people that do, should
be able to make it work.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-19 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-14 13:01 [RFC][PATCH 0/8] perf/x86: event scheduling cleanups Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-14 13:01 ` [PATCH 1/8] perf/x86/intel: Fix memory corruption Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-15 11:29 ` [tip:perf/urgent] " tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-19 6:29 ` [PATCH 1/8] " Stephane Eranian
2019-03-19 11:05 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-03-19 17:52 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-19 18:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-20 20:47 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-20 20:52 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-20 22:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-21 12:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-21 16:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-03-21 17:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-21 17:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-03-21 18:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-21 19:42 ` Tony Jones
2019-03-21 19:47 ` DSouza, Nelson
2019-03-21 20:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-21 23:16 ` DSouza, Nelson
2019-03-22 22:14 ` DSouza, Nelson
2019-03-21 17:23 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-21 17:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-03-22 19:04 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-04-03 7:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-03 10:40 ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf/x86/intel: Initialize TFA MSR tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-03 11:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-04-03 12:23 ` Vince Weaver
2019-03-14 13:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/8] perf/x86/intel: Simplify intel_tfa_commit_scheduling() Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-14 13:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/8] perf/x86: Simplify x86_pmu.get_constraints() interface Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-19 21:21 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-14 13:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/8] perf/x86: Remove PERF_X86_EVENT_COMMITTED Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-19 20:48 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-19 21:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-20 13:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-20 12:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-14 13:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/8] perf/x86/intel: Optimize intel_get_excl_constraints() Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-19 23:43 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-14 13:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/8] perf/x86: Clear ->event_constraint[] on put Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-19 21:50 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-20 12:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-14 13:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/8] perf/x86: Optimize x86_schedule_events() Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-19 23:55 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-20 13:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-20 19:30 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-14 13:01 ` [RFC][PATCH 8/8] perf/x86: Add sanity checks to x86_schedule_events() Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-15 7:15 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/8] perf/x86: event scheduling cleanups Stephane Eranian
2019-03-15 7:15 ` Stephane Eranian
2019-03-15 8:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20190319110549.GC5996@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=nelson.dsouza@intel.com \
--cc=tonyj@suse.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