From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
To: <babu.moger@amd.com>, <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
<ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>,
<maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>, <peternewman@google.com>,
<eranian@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/resctrl: Fix noncont_cat_run_test for AMD
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 16:58:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8553ddc2-ee0f-447d-8fe4-5a7dd84375f2@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3bd755d7-e5c7-3dc3-9875-4884c857e325@amd.com>
Hi Babu,
On 6/6/24 4:09 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
> Hi Reinette,
>
>
> On 6/6/2024 3:33 PM, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> Hi Babu,
>>
>> On 6/5/24 2:36 PM, Babu Moger wrote:
>>> The selftest noncont_cat_run_test fails on AMD with the warnings. Reason
>>> is, AMD supports non contiguous CBM masks but does not report it via CPUID.
>>>
>>> Update noncont_cat_run_test to check for the vendor when verifying CPUID.
>>>
>>> Fixes: ae638551ab64 ("selftests/resctrl: Add non-contiguous CBMs CAT test")
>>> Signed-off-by: Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> This was part of the series
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1708637563.git.babu.moger@amd.com/
>>> Sending this as a separate fix per review comments.
>>> ---
>>> tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
>>> index d4dffc934bc3..b2988888786e 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
>>> @@ -308,7 +308,7 @@ static int noncont_cat_run_test(const struct resctrl_test *test,
>>> else
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> - if (sparse_masks != ((ecx >> 3) & 1)) {
>>> + if ((get_vendor() == ARCH_INTEL) && sparse_masks != ((ecx >> 3) & 1)) {
>>> ksft_print_msg("CPUID output doesn't match 'sparse_masks' file content!\n");
>>> return 1;
>>> }
>>
>> Since AMD does not report this support via CPUID it does not seem
>> appropriate to use CPUID at all on AMD when doing the hardware check.
>> I think the above check makes it difficult to understand what is different
>> on AMD.
>>
>> What if instead there is a new function, for example,
>> "static bool arch_supports_noncont_cat(const struct resctrl_test *test)"
>> that returns true if the hardware supports non-contiguous CBM?
>
> Sure.
>
>>
>> The vendor check can be in there to make it obvious what is going on:
>>
>> /* AMD always supports non-contiguous CBM. */
>> if (get_vendor() == AMD)
>> return true;
>>
>> /* CPUID check for Intel here. */
>>
>> The "sparse_masks" from kernel can then be checked against
>> hardware support with an appropriate (no mention of CPUID)
>> error message if this fails.
>>
>
> Something like this?
>
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
> index d4dffc934bc3..b75d220f29f6 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cat_test.c
> @@ -288,11 +288,30 @@ static int cat_run_test(const struct resctrl_test *test, const struct user_param
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static bool arch_supports_noncont_cat(const struct resctrl_test *test)
> +{
> + unsigned int eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> +
> + /* AMD always supports non-contiguous CBM. */
> + if (get_vendor() == ARCH_AMD) {
> + return true;
> + } else {
The else can be dropped since it follows a return.
The rest of the code can be prefixed with a matching
comment like:
/* Intel support for non-contiguous CBM needs to be discovered. */
(please feel free to improve)
> + if (!strcmp(test->resource, "L3"))
> + __cpuid_count(0x10, 1, eax, ebx, ecx, edx);
> + else if (!strcmp(test->resource, "L2"))
> + __cpuid_count(0x10, 2, eax, ebx, ecx, edx);
> + else
> + return false;
> +
> + return ((ecx >> 3) & 1);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static int noncont_cat_run_test(const struct resctrl_test *test,
> const struct user_params *uparams)
> {
> unsigned long full_cache_mask, cont_mask, noncont_mask;
> - unsigned int eax, ebx, ecx, edx, sparse_masks;
> + unsigned int sparse_masks;
> int bit_center, ret;
> char schemata[64];
>
> @@ -301,15 +320,8 @@ static int noncont_cat_run_test(const struct resctrl_test *test,
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - if (!strcmp(test->resource, "L3"))
> - __cpuid_count(0x10, 1, eax, ebx, ecx, edx);
> - else if (!strcmp(test->resource, "L2"))
> - __cpuid_count(0x10, 2, eax, ebx, ecx, edx);
> - else
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> - if (sparse_masks != ((ecx >> 3) & 1)) {
> - ksft_print_msg("CPUID output doesn't match 'sparse_masks' file content!\n");
> + if (!(arch_supports_noncont_cat(test) && sparse_masks)) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Hardware does not support non-contiguous CBM!\n");
Please fix the test as well as the message. It is not an error if hardware does
not support non-contiguous CBM. It is an error if the hardware and kernel disagrees whether
non-contiguous CBM is supported.
Reinette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-06 23:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-05 21:36 [PATCH] selftests/resctrl: Fix noncont_cat_run_test for AMD Babu Moger
2024-06-06 20:33 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-06 23:09 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-06 23:58 ` Reinette Chatre [this message]
2024-06-07 18:16 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-07 21:47 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-07 22:35 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-07 10:21 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-06-10 16:00 ` [PATCH v2] " Babu Moger
2024-06-10 16:20 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-06-10 17:51 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-10 21:28 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-11 6:50 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-06-10 21:32 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 23:11 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-11 23:14 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-11 22:18 ` [PATCH v3] selftests/resctrl: Fix non-contiguous CBM " Babu Moger
2024-06-12 7:33 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-06-26 16:55 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-26 19:25 ` Shuah Khan
2024-06-26 20:44 ` Reinette Chatre
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=8553ddc2-ee0f-447d-8fe4-5a7dd84375f2@intel.com \
--to=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com \
--cc=peternewman@google.com \
--cc=shuah@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