From: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <x86@kernel.org>, <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
<tglx@linutronix.de>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <bp@alien8.de>,
<dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
<ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>, <tony.luck@intel.com>,
<ashok.raj@intel.com>, <jithu.joseph@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/fpu: Extend kernel_fpu_begin_mask() to initialize AMX state
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 11:03:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <62e2ebd9-4afa-4bb1-a30c-5ba34bc6b94e@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f82879a5-f3ca-436f-8c4a-96d4c5d90354@intel.com>
On 5/8/2024 7:40 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 5/7/24 16:53, Chang S. Bae wrote:
>
>> However, due to resource constraints in storage, AMX state is excluded
>> from the scope of state recovery. Consequently, AMX state must be in its
>> initialized state for the IFS test to run.
>
> This doesn't mention how this issue got introduced. Are we all bad at
> reading the SDM? :)
Ah, I'd rather zap out this SDM sentence.
>> When AMX workloads are running, an active user AMX state remains even
>> after a context switch, optimizing to reduce the state reload cost. In
>> such cases, the test cannot proceed if it is scheduled.
>
> This is a bit out of the blue. What does scheduling have do do with IFS?
$ echo <cpu#> > /sys/devices/virtual/misc/intel_ifs_0/run_test
Then,
run_test_store()
-> do_core_test()
-> ifs_test_core()
-> stop_core_cpuslocked()
-> stop_cpus()
-> queue_stop_cpus_work()
-> cpu_stop_queue_work()
-> wake_q_add()
-> wake_up_q()
So, the CPU stopper threads for <cpu#> and its sibling to execute
doscan() are queued up with the highest priority.
queue_stop_cpus_work() has
for_each_cpu(cpu, cpumask) {
work = &per_cpu(cpu_stopper.stop_work, cpu);
work->fn = fn;
work->arg = arg;
work->done = done;
work->caller = _RET_IP_;
if (cpu_stop_queue_work(cpu, work))
queued = true;
}
Those threads are created during early boot via
smpboot_register_percpu_thread().
> I'm not sure those last two paragraphs add much value. I'd try to
> banish most of that content to *after* you talk about the solution. Or
> maybe put it in the cover letter.
It looks like lots of distractions coming from bunch of alternatives in
different levels.
Thanks,
Chang
PS: Let me respond the solution discussion separately. I do want to
experiment the init-track behavior a bit.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-08 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-30 21:25 [PATCH 0/2] x86/fpu: Extend kernel_fpu_begin_mask() for the In-Field Scan driver Chang S. Bae
2024-04-30 21:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/fpu: Extend kernel_fpu_begin_mask() to initialize AMX state Chang S. Bae
2024-04-30 23:42 ` Ashok Raj
2024-04-30 21:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] platform/x86/intel/ifs: Initialize AMX state for the scan test Chang S. Bae
2024-05-01 0:06 ` Ashok Raj
2024-05-01 8:58 ` Hans de Goede
2024-05-08 0:22 ` Chang S. Bae
2024-05-02 11:00 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-05-02 22:19 ` Chang S. Bae
2024-05-09 0:45 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2024-05-02 20:52 ` [PATCH 0/2] x86/fpu: Extend kernel_fpu_begin_mask() for the In-Field Scan driver Chang S. Bae
2024-05-02 21:35 ` Chang S. Bae
2024-05-02 20:59 ` Dave Hansen
2024-05-07 23:53 ` [PATCH v2 " Chang S. Bae
2024-05-07 23:53 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/fpu: Extend kernel_fpu_begin_mask() to initialize AMX state Chang S. Bae
2024-05-08 13:00 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-05-08 14:40 ` Dave Hansen
2024-05-08 18:03 ` Chang S. Bae [this message]
2024-05-08 19:11 ` Dave Hansen
2024-05-09 0:29 ` Chang S. Bae
2024-05-09 17:36 ` Dave Hansen
2024-05-09 17:41 ` Dave Hansen
2024-05-09 18:41 ` Chang S. Bae
2024-05-09 18:50 ` Dave Hansen
2024-05-10 7:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-05-07 23:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] platform/x86/intel/ifs: Initialize AMX state for the scan test Chang S. Bae
2024-05-08 0:19 ` Ashok Raj
2024-05-08 0:21 ` Chang S. Bae
2024-05-08 8:28 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] x86/fpu: Extend kernel_fpu_begin_mask() for the In-Field Scan driver Ilpo Järvinen
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=62e2ebd9-4afa-4bb1-a30c-5ba34bc6b94e@intel.com \
--to=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jithu.joseph@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--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