From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>
Cc: Kishon VijayAbraham <Kishon.VijayAbraham@amd.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] x86/barrier: Do not serialize MSR accesses on AMD
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 11:52:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230622095212.20940-1-bp@alien8.de> (raw)
From: "Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@alien8.de>
AMD does not have the requirement for a synchronization barrier when
acccessing a certain group of MSRs. Do not incur that unnecessary
penalty there.
While at it, move to processor.h to avoid include hell. Untangling that
file properly is a matter for another day.
Some notes on the performance aspect of why this is relevant, courtesy
of Kishon VijayAbraham <Kishon.VijayAbraham@amd.com>:
On a AMD Zen4 system with 96 cores, a modified ipi-bench[1] on a VM
shows x2AVIC IPI rate is 3% to 4% lower than AVIC IPI rate. The
ipi-bench is modified so that the IPIs are sent between two vCPUs in the
same CCX. This also requires to pin the vCPU to a physical core to
prevent any latencies. This simulates the use case of pinning vCPUs to
the thread of a single CCX to avoid interrupt IPI latency.
In order to avoid run-to-run variance (for both x2AVIC and AVIC), the
below configurations are done:
1) Disable Power States in BIOS (to prevent the system from going to
lower power state)
2) Run the system at fixed frequency 2500MHz (to prevent the system
from increasing the frequency when the load is more)
With the above configuration:
*) Performance measured using ipi-bench for AVIC:
Average Latency: 1124.98ns [Time to send IPI from one vCPU to another vCPU]
Cumulative throughput: 42.6759M/s [Total number of IPIs sent in a second from
48 vCPUs simultaneously]
*) Performance measured using ipi-bench for x2AVIC:
Average Latency: 1172.42ns [Time to send IPI from one vCPU to another vCPU]
Cumulative throughput: 40.9432M/s [Total number of IPIs sent in a second from
48 vCPUs simultaneously]
From above, x2AVIC latency is ~4% more than AVIC. However, the expectation is
x2AVIC performance to be better or equivalent to AVIC. Upon analyzing
the perf captures, it is observed significant time is spent in
weak_wrmsr_fence() invoked by x2apic_send_IPI().
With the fix to skip weak_wrmsr_fence()
*) Performance measured using ipi-bench for x2AVIC:
Average Latency: 1117.44ns [Time to send IPI from one vCPU to another vCPU]
Cumulative throughput: 42.9608M/s [Total number of IPIs sent in a second from
48 vCPUs simultaneously]
Comparing the performance of x2AVIC with and without the fix, it can be seen
the performance improves by ~4%.
Performance captured using an unmodified ipi-bench using the 'mesh-ipi' option
with and without weak_wrmsr_fence() on a Zen4 system also showed significant
performance improvement without weak_wrmsr_fence(). The 'mesh-ipi' option ignores
CCX or CCD and just picks random vCPU.
Average throughput (10 iterations) with weak_wrmsr_fence(),
Cumulative throughput: 4933374 IPI/s
Average throughput (10 iterations) without weak_wrmsr_fence(),
Cumulative throughput: 6355156 IPI/s
[1] https://github.com/bytedance/kvm-utils/tree/master/microbenchmark/ipi-bench
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h | 18 ------------------
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
index 35389b2af88e..0216f63a366b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -81,22 +81,4 @@ do { \
#include <asm-generic/barrier.h>
-/*
- * Make previous memory operations globally visible before
- * a WRMSR.
- *
- * MFENCE makes writes visible, but only affects load/store
- * instructions. WRMSR is unfortunately not a load/store
- * instruction and is unaffected by MFENCE. The LFENCE ensures
- * that the WRMSR is not reordered.
- *
- * Most WRMSRs are full serializing instructions themselves and
- * do not require this barrier. This is only required for the
- * IA32_TSC_DEADLINE and X2APIC MSRs.
- */
-static inline void weak_wrmsr_fence(void)
-{
- asm volatile("mfence; lfence" : : : "memory");
-}
-
#endif /* _ASM_X86_BARRIER_H */
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
index b216ac80ebcc..983406342484 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
@@ -735,4 +735,23 @@ bool arch_is_platform_page(u64 paddr);
#define arch_is_platform_page arch_is_platform_page
#endif
+/*
+ * Make previous memory operations globally visible before
+ * a WRMSR.
+ *
+ * MFENCE makes writes visible, but only affects load/store
+ * instructions. WRMSR is unfortunately not a load/store
+ * instruction and is unaffected by MFENCE. The LFENCE ensures
+ * that the WRMSR is not reordered.
+ *
+ * Most WRMSRs are full serializing instructions themselves and
+ * do not require this barrier. This is only required for the
+ * IA32_TSC_DEADLINE and X2APIC MSRs.
+ */
+static inline void weak_wrmsr_fence(void)
+{
+ if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD)
+ asm volatile("mfence; lfence" : : : "memory");
+}
+
#endif /* _ASM_X86_PROCESSOR_H */
--
2.35.1
next reply other threads:[~2023-06-22 9:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-22 9:52 Borislav Petkov [this message]
2023-07-03 12:54 ` [PATCH] x86/barrier: Do not serialize MSR accesses on AMD Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-04 7:46 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-07-04 9:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-07-04 9:22 ` Borislav Petkov
[not found] ` <20231027153327.GKZTvYR3qslaTUjtCT@fat_crate.local>
[not found] ` <20231027153418.GLZTvYejCkXb03rArO@fat_crate.local>
2023-10-27 18:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/alternative: Add per-vendor patching Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-27 18:25 ` Borislav Petkov
[not found] ` <20231027153458.GMZTvYou1tlK6HD8/Y@fat_crate.local>
2023-10-27 18:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/barrier: Do not serialize MSR accesses on AMD Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-27 19:16 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-10-27 19:29 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-10-27 20:09 ` Andrew Cooper
2023-10-27 20:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-10-29 10:35 ` [PATCH -v3] " Borislav Petkov
2023-11-02 11:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Borislav Petkov
2023-11-13 8:56 ` [tip: x86/cpu] " tip-bot2 for Borislav Petkov (AMD)
2023-11-13 9:21 ` tip-bot2 for Borislav Petkov (AMD)
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=20230622095212.20940-1-bp@alien8.de \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=Kishon.VijayAbraham@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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