From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, "Brown\,
Len" <len.brown@intel.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
"Liu\, Jing2" <jing2.liu@intel.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Expand the xstate buffer on the first use of dynamic user state
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:28:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8735wd6o67.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJvTdK=mfc3giXCy_fteyR4UiZfnN5f0hvREN4TjXc5KxtiP+w@mail.gmail.com>
Len,
On Mon, Mar 29 2021 at 18:16, Len Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 2:49 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> Let me know if this problem description is fair:
>
> Many-core Xeon servers will support AMX, and when I run an AMX application
> on one, when I take an interrupt with AMX INIT=0, Linux may go idle on my CPU.
> If Linux cpuidle requests C6, the hardware will demote to C1E.
>
> The concern is that a core in C1E will negatively impact power of
> self, or performance
> of a neighboring core.
>
> This is what we are talking about, right?
Correct.
> I'm delighted that there are Xeon customers, who care about this power savings.
> Unfortunately, they are the exception, not the rule.
That maybe true or not. The point is that there is some side effect and
from a correctness point of view it needs to be addressed.
>> - Use TILERELEASE on context switch after XSAVES?
>
> Yes, that would be perfectly reasonable.
>
>> - Any other mechanism on context switch
>
> XRESTOR of a context with INIT=1 would also do it.
>
>> - Clear XFD[18] when going idle and issue TILERELEASE depending
>> on the last state
>
> I think you mean to *set* XFD.
> When the task touched AMX, he took a #NM, and we cleared XFD for that task.
> So when we get here, XFD is already clear (unarmed).
> Nevertheless, the setting of XFD is moot here.
No. We set XFD when the task which used AMX schedules out. If the CPU
reaches idle without going back to user space then XFD is still set and
AMX INIT still 0. So my assumption was that in order to issue
TILERELEASE before going idle, you need to clear XFD[18] first, but I
just saw in the spec that it is not necessary.
>> - Use any other means to set the thing back into INIT=1 state when
>> going idle
>
> TILERELEASE and XRESTOR are the tools in the toolbox, if necessary.
>
>> There is no option 'shrug and ignore' unfortunately.
>
> I'm not going to say it is impossible that this path will matter.
> If some terrible things go wrong with the hardware, and the hardware
> is configured and used in a very specific way, yes, this could matter.
So then let me summarize for the bare metal case:
1) The paragraph in the specification is unclear and needs to be
rephrased.
What I understood from your explanations so far:
When AMX is disabled by clearing XCR0[18:17], by clearing
CR4.OSXSAVE, or by setting IA32_XFD[18], then there are no
negative side effects due to AMX INIT=0 as long as the CPU is
executing.
The only possible side effect is when the CPU goes idle because
AMX INIT=0 limits C states.
2) As a consequence of #1 there is no further action required on
context switch when XFD[18] is set.
3) When the CPU goes idle with AMX INIT=0 then the idle code should
invoke TILERELEASE. Maybe the condition is not even necessary and
TILERELEASE can be invoked unconditionally before trying to enter
idle.
If that's correct, then this should be part of the next series.
> In the grand scheme of things, this is a pretty small issue, say,
> compared to the API discussion.
No argument about that.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-30 8:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-21 18:56 [PATCH v4 00/22] x86: Support Intel Advanced Matrix Extensions Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 01/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Modify the initialization helper to handle both static and dynamic buffers Chang S. Bae
2021-03-10 13:40 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 02/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Modify state copy helpers " Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 03/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Modify address finders " Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 04/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Modify the context restore helper " Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 05/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Add a new variable to indicate dynamic user states Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 06/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Add new variables to indicate dynamic xstate buffer size Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 07/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Calculate and remember dynamic xstate buffer sizes Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 08/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Convert the struct fpu 'state' field to a pointer Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 09/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Introduce helpers to manage the xstate buffer dynamically Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 10/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Define the scope of the initial xstate data Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 11/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Update the xstate save function to support dynamic states Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 12/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Update the xstate buffer address finder " Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 13/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Update the xstate context copy function " Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 14/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Expand the xstate buffer on the first use of dynamic user state Chang S. Bae
2021-03-20 22:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-20 22:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-23 21:01 ` Len Brown
2021-03-24 3:14 ` Liu, Jing2
2021-03-24 21:09 ` Len Brown
2021-03-24 21:26 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-24 21:30 ` Dave Hansen
2021-03-24 21:42 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-24 21:58 ` Dave Hansen
2021-03-24 22:12 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-25 5:12 ` Liu, Jing2
2021-03-25 6:59 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-03-25 7:26 ` Liu, Jing2
2021-03-23 21:52 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-03-24 14:24 ` Dave Hansen
2021-03-29 13:14 ` Len Brown
2021-03-29 13:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-29 15:43 ` Len Brown
2021-03-29 16:06 ` Len Brown
2021-03-29 17:43 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-29 18:57 ` Len Brown
2021-03-29 18:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-29 22:16 ` Len Brown
2021-03-30 8:28 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2021-03-30 16:38 ` Len Brown
2021-03-26 16:34 ` Jann Horn
2021-03-29 18:14 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 15/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Support ptracer-induced xstate buffer expansion Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 16/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Extend the table to map state components with features Chang S. Bae
2021-03-20 21:25 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-23 21:52 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 17/22] x86/cpufeatures/amx: Enumerate Advanced Matrix Extension (AMX) feature bits Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 18/22] x86/fpu/amx: Define AMX state components and have it used for boot-time checks Chang S. Bae
2021-03-20 21:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-23 21:52 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 19/22] x86/fpu/amx: Enable the AMX feature in 64-bit mode Chang S. Bae
2021-03-20 21:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-23 21:51 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 20/22] selftest/x86/amx: Include test cases for the AMX state management Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 21/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Support dynamic user state in the signal handling path Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 18:56 ` [PATCH v4 22/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Introduce boot-parameters to control state component support Chang S. Bae
2021-02-21 19:30 ` Randy Dunlap
2021-02-21 20:10 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-02-21 20:37 ` Randy Dunlap
2021-03-20 20:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-25 22:59 ` Len Brown
2021-03-25 23:10 ` Dave Hansen
2021-03-26 15:27 ` Len Brown
2021-03-26 19:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-26 1:41 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-26 15:33 ` Len Brown
2021-03-26 15:48 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-26 17:53 ` Len Brown
2021-03-26 18:12 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-27 4:53 ` Len Brown
2021-03-27 22:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-29 13:31 ` Len Brown
2021-03-29 14:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-26 18:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-27 4:41 ` Len Brown
2021-03-26 1:50 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-26 15:36 ` Len Brown
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=8735wd6o67.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=jing2.liu@intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@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