From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
eranian@google.com, ak@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] perf/x86/intel/ds: Flush the PEBS buffer in PEBS enable
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 10:22:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49b6f5fb-665b-2857-788b-e5082bb7374b@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230414102908.GC83892@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 2023-04-14 6:29 a.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 11:13:09AM -0700, kan.liang@linux.intel.com wrote:
>
>> arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>> index 3a77f4336df7..4639d4c1e98d 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>> @@ -1257,20 +1257,18 @@ pebs_update_state(bool needed_cb, struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc,
>> if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.pebs_baseline && add) {
>> u64 pebs_data_cfg;
>>
>> - /* Clear pebs_data_cfg and pebs_record_size for first PEBS. */
>> - if (cpuc->n_pebs == 1) {
>> + /* Clear pebs_data_cfg for first PEBS. */
>> + if (cpuc->n_pebs == 1)
>> cpuc->pebs_data_cfg = 0;
>> - cpuc->pebs_record_size = sizeof(struct pebs_basic);
>> - }
>>
>> pebs_data_cfg = pebs_update_adaptive_cfg(event);
>>
>> - /* Update pebs_record_size if new event requires more data. */
>> - if (pebs_data_cfg & ~cpuc->pebs_data_cfg) {
>> + /*
>> + * Only update the pebs_data_cfg here. The pebs_record_size
>> + * will be updated later when the new pebs_data_cfg takes effect.
>> + */
>> + if (pebs_data_cfg & ~cpuc->pebs_data_cfg)
>> cpuc->pebs_data_cfg |= pebs_data_cfg;
>> - adaptive_pebs_record_size_update();
>> - update = true;
>> - }
>> }
>>
>> if (update)
> pebs_update_threshold(cpuc);
>
> Now, pebs_update_threshold() will actually use
> ->pebs_record_size, but afaict the above now has a path through (for
> example for the first event) where update is true but ->pebs_record_size
> is unset/stale.
>
> I think it all works out, but it is quite a mess and hard to follow.
With this patch, the pebs_update_threshold() will be delayed to
intel_pmu_pebs_enable() for the adaptive PEBS.
I think we may reuse the pebs_data_cfg method for the previous fixed
PEBS as well and delay the DS update to intel_pmu_pebs_enable() as well.
So everything will be consistent.
I will do more tests and probably send a clean up patch later separately.
>
>> @@ -1331,6 +1329,13 @@ static void intel_pmu_pebs_via_pt_enable(struct perf_event *event)
>> wrmsrl(base + idx, value);
>> }
>>
>> +static inline void intel_pmu_drain_large_pebs(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
>> +{
>> + if (cpuc->n_pebs == cpuc->n_large_pebs &&
>> + cpuc->n_pebs != cpuc->n_pebs_via_pt)
>> + intel_pmu_drain_pebs_buffer();
>> +}
>
> Its been a minute since I looked at this code; but why only for large
> pebs? Surely flushing is quick when the DS is actually empty and that
> stops us having to worry if there's races where there might be a single
> entry in.
The AUTO_RELOAD is a separate feature. It should be always enabled when
a fixed period is set. That's not the case for the large PEBS, which
only supports partial sample type.
There should be some overhead for the AUTO_RELOAD + single PEBS case. We
have to update the event count.
>
>> void intel_pmu_pebs_enable(struct perf_event *event)
>> {
>> struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
>> @@ -1350,6 +1355,18 @@ void intel_pmu_pebs_enable(struct perf_event *event)
>> if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.pebs_baseline) {
>> hwc->config |= ICL_EVENTSEL_ADAPTIVE;
>> if (cpuc->pebs_data_cfg != cpuc->active_pebs_data_cfg) {
>> + /*
>> + * A system-wide PEBS event with the large PEBS
>> + * config may still be enabled when switching the
>> + * context. Some PEBS records for the system-wide
>> + * PEBS may be generated while the old event has
>> + * been scheduled out but the new one hasn't been
>> + * scheduled in. It's not enough to only flush the
>> + * buffer when a PEBS event is disable.
>> + */
>
> Perhaps just:
>
> /*
> * drain_pebs() assumes uniform record size;
> * hence we need to drain when changing said
> * size.
> */
>
Sure, I will update in V4.
Thanks,
Kan
>
>> + intel_pmu_drain_large_pebs(cpuc);
>> + adaptive_pebs_record_size_update();
>> + pebs_update_threshold(cpuc);
>> wrmsrl(MSR_PEBS_DATA_CFG, cpuc->pebs_data_cfg);
>> cpuc->active_pebs_data_cfg = cpuc->pebs_data_cfg;
>> }
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-14 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-10 18:13 [PATCH V3] perf/x86/intel/ds: Flush the PEBS buffer in PEBS enable kan.liang
2023-04-14 10:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-04-14 14:22 ` Liang, Kan [this message]
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=49b6f5fb-665b-2857-788b-e5082bb7374b@linux.intel.com \
--to=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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