From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: kan.liang@linux.intel.com
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, acme@kernel.org,
namhyung@kernel.org, irogers@google.com, eranian@google.com,
ak@linux.intel.com, yunying.sun@intel.com,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/8] perf/x86/uncore: Save the unit control address of all units
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 17:50:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240617155027.GX8774@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240614134631.1092359-2-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 06:46:24AM -0700, kan.liang@linux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
>
> The unit control address of some CXL units may be wrongly calculated
> under some configuration on a EMR machine.
>
> The current implementation only saves the unit control address of the
> units from the first die, and the first unit of the rest of dies. Perf
> assumed that the units from the other dies have the same offset as the
> first die. So the unit control address of the rest of the units can be
> calculated. However, the assumption is wrong, especially for the CXL
> units.
Oh gawd, that's terrible. Was this actually specified, or are we hacking
around a firmware fail?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-17 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-14 13:46 [PATCH V2 0/8] Support HBM and CXL PMON uncore counters kan.liang
2024-06-14 13:46 ` [PATCH V2 1/8] perf/x86/uncore: Save the unit control address of all units kan.liang
2024-06-17 15:50 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2024-06-17 17:51 ` Liang, Kan
2024-06-24 15:09 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Kan Liang
2024-06-14 13:46 ` [PATCH V2 2/8] perf/x86/uncore: Support per PMU cpumask kan.liang
2024-06-24 15:09 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Kan Liang
2024-06-14 13:46 ` [PATCH V2 3/8] perf/x86/uncore: Retrieve the unit ID from the unit control RB tree kan.liang
2024-06-24 15:09 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Kan Liang
2024-06-14 13:46 ` [PATCH V2 4/8] perf/x86/uncore: Apply the unit control RB tree to MMIO uncore units kan.liang
2024-06-24 15:09 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Kan Liang
2024-06-14 13:46 ` [PATCH V2 5/8] perf/x86/uncore: Apply the unit control RB tree to MSR " kan.liang
2024-06-24 15:09 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Kan Liang
2024-06-14 13:46 ` [PATCH V2 6/8] perf/x86/uncore: Apply the unit control RB tree to PCI " kan.liang
2024-06-24 15:09 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Kan Liang
2024-06-14 13:46 ` [PATCH V2 7/8] perf/x86/uncore: Cleanup unused unit structure kan.liang
2024-06-24 15:09 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Kan Liang
2024-06-14 13:46 ` [PATCH V2 8/8] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Support HBM and CXL PMON counters kan.liang
2024-06-24 15:09 ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Kan Liang
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=20240617155027.GX8774@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=yunying.sun@intel.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