public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] x86, Clean up smp_num_siblings calculation
@ 2014-06-02 11:51 Prarit Bhargava
  2014-06-02 16:30 ` Paul Gortmaker
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Prarit Bhargava @ 2014-06-02 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel
  Cc: Prarit Bhargava, Oren Twaig, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar,
	H. Peter Anvin, x86, Borislav Petkov, Paul Gortmaker,
	Andrew Morton, Andi Kleen, Dave Jones, Torsten Kaiser,
	Jan Beulich, Jan Kiszka, Toshi Kani, Andrew Jones

I have a system on which I have disabled threading in the BIOS, and I am booting
the kernel with the option "idle=poll".

The kernel displays

process: WARNING: polling idle and HT enabled, performance may degrade

which is incorrect -- I've already disabled HT.

This warning is issued here:

void select_idle_routine(const struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
{
        if (boot_option_idle_override == IDLE_POLL && smp_num_siblings > 1)
                pr_warn_once("WARNING: polling idle and HT enabled, performance may degrade\n");

>From my understanding of the other areas of kernel that use smp_num_siblings,
the value is supposed to be the actual number of threads per core, and
this value of smp_num_siblings is incorrect.  In theory, it should be 1 but it
is reported as 2.  When I looked into how smp_num_siblings is calculated I
found the following call sequence in the kernel:

start_kernel ->
        check_bugs ->
                identify_boot_cpu ->
                                identify_cpu ->
                                        c_init = init_intel
                                                init_intel ->
                                                        detect_extended_topology
                                                        (sets value)

                                        OR

                                        c_init = init_amd
                                                init_amd -> amd_detect_cmp
                                                             -> amd_get_topology
                                                                (sets value)
                                                         -> detect_ht()
                                        ...		    (sets value)
                                        detect_ht()
                                        (also sets value)

ie) it is set three times in some cases and overwritten in other cases.

It should be noted that nothing in the identify_cpu() path or the cpu_up()
path requires smp_num_siblings to be set, prior to the final call to
detect_ht().

For x86 boxes without X86_FEATURE_XTOPOLOGY, smp_num_siblings is set to a
value read in a CPUID call in detect_ht().  This value is the *factory
defined* value in all cases; even if HT is disabled in BIOS the value
still returns 2 if the CPU supports HT.  AMD also reports the factory
defined value in all cases.

For Intel x86 boxes with X86_FEATURE_XTOPOLOGY, smp_num_siblings is set to a
value read from the 0xb leaf of CPUID.  This value is also the *factory
defined* value in all cases.

For new-ish AMD x86 boxes, smp_num_siblings is also set to the *factory*
defined value.

That is, even with threading disabled in BIOSes on these systems,

crash> p smp_num_siblings
smp_num_siblings = $1 = 0x2

smp_num_siblings should be calculated a single time on cpu 0 to determine
whether or not the system is multi-threaded or not.  We can easily do
this by examining the boot cpu's cpu_sibling_mask after the mask has been
setup in the boot up code path.

After the patch, on a system with HT enabled,

crash> p smp_num_siblings
smp_num_siblings = $1 = 0x2

On a system with HT disabled,

crash> p smp_num_siblings
smp_num_siblings = $1 = 0x1

Other uses of smp_num_siblings involve oprofile (used after boot), and
the perf code which is done well after the initial cpus are brought online.

[v2]: After comment from Oren Twaig, rework to single patch.
Unfortunately there was no easy way to take into account the various
settings of smp_num_siblings and fix it in two patches.

Cc: Oren Twaig <oren@scalemp.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@googlemail.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>
Cc: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c      |    1 -
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c   |   23 +++++++++++------------
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c |    2 +-
 arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c      |   10 +++++++---
 4 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
index ce8b8ff..6aca2b6 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
@@ -304,7 +304,6 @@ static void amd_get_topology(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 		node_id = ecx & 7;
 
 		/* get compute unit information */
-		smp_num_siblings = ((ebx >> 8) & 3) + 1;
 		c->compute_unit_id = ebx & 0xff;
 		cores_per_cu += ((ebx >> 8) & 3);
 	} else if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_NODEID_MSR)) {
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
index a135239..81a5aac 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
@@ -507,42 +507,41 @@ void detect_ht(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 	u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
 	int index_msb, core_bits;
 	static bool printed;
+	int threads_per_core;
 
 	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_HT))
 		return;
 
-	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CMP_LEGACY))
+	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CMP_LEGACY)) {
+		threads_per_core = 1;
 		goto out;
+	}
 
 	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_XTOPOLOGY))
 		return;
 
 	cpuid(1, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
 
-	smp_num_siblings = (ebx & 0xff0000) >> 16;
+	threads_per_core = (ebx & 0xff0000) >> 16;
 
-	if (smp_num_siblings == 1) {
-		printk_once(KERN_INFO "CPU0: Hyper-Threading is disabled\n");
+	if (threads_per_core <= 1) {
+		pr_info_once("CPU: Hyper-Threading is unsupported on this processor.\n");
 		goto out;
 	}
 
-	if (smp_num_siblings <= 1)
-		goto out;
-
-	index_msb = get_count_order(smp_num_siblings);
+	index_msb = get_count_order(threads_per_core);
 	c->phys_proc_id = apic->phys_pkg_id(c->initial_apicid, index_msb);
 
-	smp_num_siblings = smp_num_siblings / c->x86_max_cores;
+	threads_per_core = threads_per_core / c->x86_max_cores;
 
-	index_msb = get_count_order(smp_num_siblings);
+	index_msb = get_count_order(threads_per_core);
 
 	core_bits = get_count_order(c->x86_max_cores);
 
 	c->cpu_core_id = apic->phys_pkg_id(c->initial_apicid, index_msb) &
 				       ((1 << core_bits) - 1);
-
 out:
-	if (!printed && (c->x86_max_cores * smp_num_siblings) > 1) {
+	if (!printed && (c->x86_max_cores * threads_per_core) > 1) {
 		printk(KERN_INFO  "CPU: Physical Processor ID: %d\n",
 		       c->phys_proc_id);
 		printk(KERN_INFO  "CPU: Processor Core ID: %d\n",
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c
index 4c60eaf..a9b837e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ void detect_extended_topology(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 	/*
 	 * Populate HT related information from sub-leaf level 0.
 	 */
-	core_level_siblings = smp_num_siblings = LEVEL_MAX_SIBLINGS(ebx);
+	core_level_siblings = LEVEL_MAX_SIBLINGS(ebx);
 	core_plus_mask_width = ht_mask_width = BITS_SHIFT_NEXT_LEVEL(eax);
 
 	sub_index = 1;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
index 3482693..9eb96d2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -351,8 +351,7 @@ static bool match_mc(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, struct cpuinfo_x86 *o)
 
 void set_cpu_sibling_map(int cpu)
 {
-	bool has_smt = smp_num_siblings > 1;
-	bool has_mp = has_smt || boot_cpu_data.x86_max_cores > 1;
+	bool has_mp = boot_cpu_data.x86_max_cores > 1;
 	struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
 	struct cpuinfo_x86 *o;
 	int i;
@@ -364,13 +363,14 @@ void set_cpu_sibling_map(int cpu)
 		cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpu_llc_shared_mask(cpu));
 		cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpu_core_mask(cpu));
 		c->booted_cores = 1;
+		smp_num_siblings = 1;
 		return;
 	}
 
 	for_each_cpu(i, cpu_sibling_setup_mask) {
 		o = &cpu_data(i);
 
-		if ((i == cpu) || (has_smt && match_smt(c, o)))
+		if ((i == cpu) || match_smt(c, o))
 			link_mask(sibling, cpu, i);
 
 		if ((i == cpu) || (has_mp && match_llc(c, o)))
@@ -408,6 +408,10 @@ void set_cpu_sibling_map(int cpu)
 				c->booted_cores = cpu_data(i).booted_cores;
 		}
 	}
+
+	/* Only need to check this on the boot cpu, o/w it is disabled */
+	if (cpu == 0)
+		smp_num_siblings = cpumask_weight(cpu_sibling_mask(cpu));
 }
 
 /* maps the cpu to the sched domain representing multi-core */
-- 
1.7.9.3


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] x86, Clean up smp_num_siblings calculation
@ 2014-06-02 14:13 Prarit Bhargava
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Prarit Bhargava @ 2014-06-02 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel
  Cc: Prarit Bhargava, Oren Twaig, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar,
	H. Peter Anvin, x86, Borislav Petkov, Paul Gortmaker,
	Andrew Morton, Andi Kleen, Dave Jones, Torsten Kaiser,
	Jan Beulich, Jan Kiszka, Toshi Kani, Andrew Jones

oops.  Forgot a signed-off-by ...

Resending.

P.

----8<----

I have a system on which I have disabled threading in the BIOS, and I am booting
the kernel with the option "idle=poll".

The kernel displays

process: WARNING: polling idle and HT enabled, performance may degrade

which is incorrect -- I've already disabled HT.

This warning is issued here:

void select_idle_routine(const struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
{
        if (boot_option_idle_override == IDLE_POLL && smp_num_siblings > 1)
                pr_warn_once("WARNING: polling idle and HT enabled, performance may degrade\n");

>From my understanding of the other areas of kernel that use smp_num_siblings,
the value is supposed to be the actual number of threads per core, and
this value of smp_num_siblings is incorrect.  In theory, it should be 1 but it
is reported as 2.  When I looked into how smp_num_siblings is calculated I
found the following call sequence in the kernel:

start_kernel ->
        check_bugs ->
                identify_boot_cpu ->
                                identify_cpu ->
                                        c_init = init_intel
                                                init_intel ->
                                                        detect_extended_topology
                                                        (sets value)

                                        OR

                                        c_init = init_amd
                                                init_amd -> amd_detect_cmp
                                                             -> amd_get_topology
                                                                (sets value)
                                                         -> detect_ht()
                                        ...		    (sets value)
                                        detect_ht()
                                        (also sets value)

ie) it is set three times in some cases and overwritten in other cases.

It should be noted that nothing in the identify_cpu() path or the cpu_up()
path requires smp_num_siblings to be set, prior to the final call to
detect_ht().

For x86 boxes without X86_FEATURE_XTOPOLOGY, smp_num_siblings is set to a
value read in a CPUID call in detect_ht().  This value is the *factory
defined* value in all cases; even if HT is disabled in BIOS the value
still returns 2 if the CPU supports HT.  AMD also reports the factory
defined value in all cases.

For Intel x86 boxes with X86_FEATURE_XTOPOLOGY, smp_num_siblings is set to a
value read from the 0xb leaf of CPUID.  This value is also the *factory
defined* value in all cases.

For new-ish AMD x86 boxes, smp_num_siblings is also set to the *factory*
defined value.

That is, even with threading disabled in BIOSes on these systems,

crash> p smp_num_siblings
smp_num_siblings = $1 = 0x2

smp_num_siblings should be calculated a single time on cpu 0 to determine
whether or not the system is multi-threaded or not.  We can easily do
this by examining the boot cpu's cpu_sibling_mask after the mask has been
setup in the boot up code path.

After the patch, on a system with HT enabled,

crash> p smp_num_siblings
smp_num_siblings = $1 = 0x2

On a system with HT disabled,

crash> p smp_num_siblings
smp_num_siblings = $1 = 0x1

Other uses of smp_num_siblings involve oprofile (used after boot), and
the perf code which is done well after the initial cpus are brought online.

[v2]: After comment from Oren Twaig, rework to single patch.
Unfortunately there was no easy way to take into account the various
settings of smp_num_siblings and fix it in two patches.

Cc: Oren Twaig <oren@scalemp.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@googlemail.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>
Cc: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c      |    1 -
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c   |   23 +++++++++++------------
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c |    2 +-
 arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c      |   10 +++++++---
 4 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
index ce8b8ff..6aca2b6 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
@@ -304,7 +304,6 @@ static void amd_get_topology(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 		node_id = ecx & 7;
 
 		/* get compute unit information */
-		smp_num_siblings = ((ebx >> 8) & 3) + 1;
 		c->compute_unit_id = ebx & 0xff;
 		cores_per_cu += ((ebx >> 8) & 3);
 	} else if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_NODEID_MSR)) {
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
index a135239..81a5aac 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
@@ -507,42 +507,41 @@ void detect_ht(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 	u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
 	int index_msb, core_bits;
 	static bool printed;
+	int threads_per_core;
 
 	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_HT))
 		return;
 
-	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CMP_LEGACY))
+	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CMP_LEGACY)) {
+		threads_per_core = 1;
 		goto out;
+	}
 
 	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_XTOPOLOGY))
 		return;
 
 	cpuid(1, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
 
-	smp_num_siblings = (ebx & 0xff0000) >> 16;
+	threads_per_core = (ebx & 0xff0000) >> 16;
 
-	if (smp_num_siblings == 1) {
-		printk_once(KERN_INFO "CPU0: Hyper-Threading is disabled\n");
+	if (threads_per_core <= 1) {
+		pr_info_once("CPU: Hyper-Threading is unsupported on this processor.\n");
 		goto out;
 	}
 
-	if (smp_num_siblings <= 1)
-		goto out;
-
-	index_msb = get_count_order(smp_num_siblings);
+	index_msb = get_count_order(threads_per_core);
 	c->phys_proc_id = apic->phys_pkg_id(c->initial_apicid, index_msb);
 
-	smp_num_siblings = smp_num_siblings / c->x86_max_cores;
+	threads_per_core = threads_per_core / c->x86_max_cores;
 
-	index_msb = get_count_order(smp_num_siblings);
+	index_msb = get_count_order(threads_per_core);
 
 	core_bits = get_count_order(c->x86_max_cores);
 
 	c->cpu_core_id = apic->phys_pkg_id(c->initial_apicid, index_msb) &
 				       ((1 << core_bits) - 1);
-
 out:
-	if (!printed && (c->x86_max_cores * smp_num_siblings) > 1) {
+	if (!printed && (c->x86_max_cores * threads_per_core) > 1) {
 		printk(KERN_INFO  "CPU: Physical Processor ID: %d\n",
 		       c->phys_proc_id);
 		printk(KERN_INFO  "CPU: Processor Core ID: %d\n",
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c
index 4c60eaf..a9b837e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ void detect_extended_topology(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 	/*
 	 * Populate HT related information from sub-leaf level 0.
 	 */
-	core_level_siblings = smp_num_siblings = LEVEL_MAX_SIBLINGS(ebx);
+	core_level_siblings = LEVEL_MAX_SIBLINGS(ebx);
 	core_plus_mask_width = ht_mask_width = BITS_SHIFT_NEXT_LEVEL(eax);
 
 	sub_index = 1;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
index 3482693..9eb96d2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -351,8 +351,7 @@ static bool match_mc(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, struct cpuinfo_x86 *o)
 
 void set_cpu_sibling_map(int cpu)
 {
-	bool has_smt = smp_num_siblings > 1;
-	bool has_mp = has_smt || boot_cpu_data.x86_max_cores > 1;
+	bool has_mp = boot_cpu_data.x86_max_cores > 1;
 	struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu);
 	struct cpuinfo_x86 *o;
 	int i;
@@ -364,13 +363,14 @@ void set_cpu_sibling_map(int cpu)
 		cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpu_llc_shared_mask(cpu));
 		cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpu_core_mask(cpu));
 		c->booted_cores = 1;
+		smp_num_siblings = 1;
 		return;
 	}
 
 	for_each_cpu(i, cpu_sibling_setup_mask) {
 		o = &cpu_data(i);
 
-		if ((i == cpu) || (has_smt && match_smt(c, o)))
+		if ((i == cpu) || match_smt(c, o))
 			link_mask(sibling, cpu, i);
 
 		if ((i == cpu) || (has_mp && match_llc(c, o)))
@@ -408,6 +408,10 @@ void set_cpu_sibling_map(int cpu)
 				c->booted_cores = cpu_data(i).booted_cores;
 		}
 	}
+
+	/* Only need to check this on the boot cpu, o/w it is disabled */
+	if (cpu == 0)
+		smp_num_siblings = cpumask_weight(cpu_sibling_mask(cpu));
 }
 
 /* maps the cpu to the sched domain representing multi-core */
-- 
1.7.9.3


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-06-19 15:28 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-06-02 11:51 [PATCH] x86, Clean up smp_num_siblings calculation Prarit Bhargava
2014-06-02 16:30 ` Paul Gortmaker
2014-06-02 17:20   ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-06-04 13:12   ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-06-19 15:28   ` Prarit Bhargava
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-06-02 14:13 Prarit Bhargava

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox