From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
Christopherson Sean J <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/resctrl: Get max rmid and occupancy scale directly from CPUID instead of cpuinfo_x86
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 01:09:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190617080909.GC214090@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190617075214.GB27127@zn.tnic>
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 09:52:14AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 08:18:09PM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> > index 2c57fffebf9b..f080be35da41 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> > @@ -801,6 +801,31 @@ static void init_speculation_control(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > +static void get_cqm_info(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > +{
> > + if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC)) {
> > + u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> > +
> > + /* QoS sub-leaf, EAX=0Fh, ECX=0 */
> > + cpuid_count(0x0000000F, 0, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> > + /* will be overridden if occupancy monitoring exists */
> > + c->x86_cache_max_rmid = ebx;
> > +
> > + if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_OCCUP_LLC) ||
> > + cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL) ||
> > + cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL)) {
> > + /* QoS sub-leaf, EAX=0Fh, ECX=1 */
> > + cpuid_count(0x0000000F, 1, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> > +
> > + c->x86_cache_max_rmid = ecx;
> > + c->x86_cache_occ_scale = ebx;
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + c->x86_cache_max_rmid = -1;
> > + c->x86_cache_occ_scale = -1;
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > void get_cpu_cap(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > {
> > u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> > @@ -832,33 +857,6 @@ void get_cpu_cap(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > c->x86_capability[CPUID_D_1_EAX] = eax;
> > }
> >
> > - /* Additional Intel-defined flags: level 0x0000000F */
> > - if (c->cpuid_level >= 0x0000000F) {
> > -
> > - /* QoS sub-leaf, EAX=0Fh, ECX=0 */
> > - cpuid_count(0x0000000F, 0, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> > - c->x86_capability[CPUID_F_0_EDX] = edx;
> > -
> > - if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC)) {
> > - /* will be overridden if occupancy monitoring exists */
> > - c->x86_cache_max_rmid = ebx;
> > -
> > - /* QoS sub-leaf, EAX=0Fh, ECX=1 */
> > - cpuid_count(0x0000000F, 1, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> > - c->x86_capability[CPUID_F_1_EDX] = edx;
> > -
> > - if ((cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_OCCUP_LLC)) ||
> > - ((cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL)) ||
> > - (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL)))) {
> > - c->x86_cache_max_rmid = ecx;
> > - c->x86_cache_occ_scale = ebx;
> > - }
> > - } else {
> > - c->x86_cache_max_rmid = -1;
> > - c->x86_cache_occ_scale = -1;
> > - }
> > - }
>
> Why are you doing this carving out into a separate function since you're
> keeping the cpuinfo_x86 members?
I just keep the code a bit uniform around the calling area where
a few functions are called. So get_cqm_info() makes the code a bit more
readable.
init_scattered_cpuid_features(c);
init_speculation_control(c);
+ get_cqm_info(c);
/*
* Clear/Set all flags overridden by options, after probe.
* This needs to happen each time we re-probe, which may happen
* several times during CPU initialization.
*/
apply_forced_caps(c);
}
Maybe not? If the function is not good, I can directly put the code here?
Thanks.
-Fenghua
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-17 8:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-16 17:14 [PATCH 0/3] x86/cpufeatures: Re-arrange a few features and enumerate AVX512 BFLOAT16 intructions Fenghua Yu
2019-06-16 17:14 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86/resctrl: Get max rmid and occupancy scale directly from CPUID instead of cpuinfo_x86 Fenghua Yu
2019-06-16 17:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-06-17 3:28 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-06-16 20:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-17 3:18 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-06-17 7:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-06-17 8:09 ` Fenghua Yu [this message]
2019-06-17 8:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-06-17 8:35 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-06-17 9:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-06-16 17:14 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86/cpufeatures: Combine word 11 and 12 into new scattered features word 11 Fenghua Yu
2019-06-16 17:14 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86/cpufeatures: Enumerate new AVX512 BFLOAT16 instructions Fenghua Yu
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=20190617080909.GC214090@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com \
--to=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.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