From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
To: Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com>
Cc: <rui.zhang@intel.com>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <acme@kernel.org>,
<irogers@google.com>, <mark.rutland@arm.com>, <jolsa@kernel.org>,
<alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>, <peterz@infradead.org>,
<linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>,
<ananth.narayan@amd.com>, <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
<ravi.bangoria@amd.com>, <sandipan.das@amd.com>,
<linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <namhyung@kernel.org>,
<adrian.hunter@intel.com>, <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
<tglx@linutronix.de>, <bp@alien8.de>,
<dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
<kees@kernel.org>, <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
<oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/10] Add per-core RAPL energy counter support for AMD CPUs
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 12:09:03 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0afc09f6-da93-dde5-45ad-d4784b9b4227@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240624055907.7720-1-Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com>
Hello Dhananjay,
On 6/24/2024 11:28 AM, Dhananjay Ugwekar wrote:
> Currently the energy-cores event in the power PMU aggregates energy
> consumption data at a package level. On the other hand the core energy
> RAPL counter in AMD CPUs has a core scope (which means the energy
> consumption is recorded separately for each core). Earlier efforts to add
> the core event in the power PMU had failed [1], due to the difference in
> the scope of these two events. Hence, there is a need for a new core scope
> PMU.
>
> This patchset adds a new "power_per_core" PMU alongside the existing
> "power" PMU, which will be responsible for collecting the new
> "energy-per-core" event.
>
> Tested the package level and core level PMU counters with workloads
> pinned to different CPUs.
>
> Results with workload pinned to CPU 1 in Core 1 on an AMD Zen4 Genoa
> machine:
>
> $ perf stat -a --per-core -e power_per_core/energy-per-core/ -- sleep 1
>
> Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
>
> S0-D0-C0 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C1 1 5.72 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C2 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C3 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C4 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C5 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C6 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C7 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C8 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C9 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C10 1 0.02 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
Tested a bunch of scenarios on my 2P 3rd Generation EPYC server and this
time around I'm seeing the expected behavior. I'll leave some of
scenarios I've tested below:
$ for i in `seq 0 63`; do taskset -c $i loop & done
$ sudo perf stat -a --per-core -e power_per_core/energy-per-core/ -- sleep 5
S0-D0-C0 1 10.82 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C1 1 10.87 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C2 1 10.86 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C3 1 10.89 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C4 1 10.91 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
...
S0-D0-C63 1 11.03 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C0 1 0.19 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C1 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C2 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C3 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C4 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
...
S1-D1-C63 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
$ for i in `seq 64 127`; do taskset -c $i loop & done
$ sudo perf stat -a --per-core -e power_per_core/energy-per-core/ -- sleep 5
S0-D0-C0 1 0.17 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C1 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C2 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C3 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C4 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
...
S0-D0-C63 1 0.01 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C0 1 10.51 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C1 1 10.50 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C2 1 10.52 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C3 1 10.51 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C4 1 10.51 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
...
S1-D1-C63 1 10.59 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
$ for i in `seq 0 15`; do taskset -c $i loop & done
$ sudo perf stat -a --per-core -e power_per_core/energy-per-core/ -- sleep 5
S0-D0-C0 1 11.16 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C1 1 11.21 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C2 1 11.20 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C3 1 11.24 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C4 1 11.25 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C5 1 11.26 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C6 1 11.25 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C7 1 11.25 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C8 1 11.42 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C9 1 11.43 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C10 1 11.47 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C11 1 11.43 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C12 1 11.44 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C13 1 11.41 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C14 1 11.40 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C15 1 11.41 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C16 1 0.33 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
...
S0-D0-C63 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C0 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C1 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C2 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C3 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C4 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C5 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C6 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C7 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C8 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C9 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C10 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C11 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C12 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C13 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C14 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C15 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C16 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
...
S1-D1-C63 1 0.01 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
$ for i in `seq 0 7` `seq 128 131` `seq 64 71` `seq 192 199`; do taskset -c $i loop & done
$ sudo perf stat -a --per-core -e power_per_core/energy-per-core/ -- sleep 5
S0-D0-C0 1 18.68 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C1 1 18.20 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C2 1 18.27 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C3 1 18.41 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C4 1 16.94 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C5 1 16.95 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C6 1 16.92 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C7 1 16.94 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S0-D0-C8 1 0.39 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
...
S0-D0-C63 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C0 1 18.59 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C1 1 18.39 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C2 1 17.50 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C3 1 18.29 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C4 1 18.58 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C5 1 17.62 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C6 1 17.75 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C7 1 17.53 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
S1-D1-C8 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
...
S1-D1-C63 1 0.00 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
Unlike last time, each socket is reporting accurate values for all the
scenarios I've tried above.
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3e766f0e-37d4-0f82-3868-31b14228868d@linux.intel.com/
>
> This patchset applies cleanly on top of v6.10-rc4 as well as latest
> tip/master.
P.S. I tested this on top of v6.10-rc4 this time around.
Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
>
> v3 changes:
> * Patch 1 added to introduce the logical_core_id which is unique across
> the system (Prateek)
> * Use the unique topology_logical_core_id() instead of
> topology_core_id() (which is only unique within a package on tested
> AMD and Intel systems) in Patch 10
>
> [..snip..]
>
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-24 6:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-24 5:58 Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 5:58 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] x86/topology: Introduce topology_logical_core_id() Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-26 14:14 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-06-24 5:58 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] perf/x86/rapl: Fix the energy-pkg event for AMD CPUs Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-26 14:18 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-06-26 15:34 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-07-01 12:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-07-02 9:39 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] perf/x86/rapl: Rename rapl_pmu variables Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] perf/x86/rapl: Make rapl_model struct global Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] perf/x86/rapl: Move cpumask variable to rapl_pmus struct Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-07-01 13:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-07-02 10:16 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] perf/x86/rapl: Add wrapper for online/offline functions Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] perf/x86/rapl: Add an argument to the cleanup and init functions Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] perf/x86/rapl: Modify the generic variable names to *_pkg* Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-07-01 13:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-07-02 2:25 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-07-02 10:20 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-07-03 4:07 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-07-03 6:31 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-07-05 2:18 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-07-05 9:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-07-08 1:56 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-06-24 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] perf/x86/rapl: Remove the global variable rapl_msrs Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 5:59 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] perf/x86/rapl: Add per-core energy counter support for AMD CPUs Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-26 15:18 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-06-26 16:37 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-27 6:49 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-06-27 11:13 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-24 6:39 ` K Prateek Nayak [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=0afc09f6-da93-dde5-45ad-d4784b9b4227@amd.com \
--to=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ananth.narayan@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=oleksandr@natalenko.name \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ravi.bangoria@amd.com \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=sandipan.das@amd.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®