From: kan.liang@linux.intel.com
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, jolsa@redhat.com, eranian@google.com,
ak@linux.intel.com, Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH V2 1/4] perf/x86/intel: fix event update for auto-reload
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 11:42:48 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1513798971-4257-2-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1513798971-4257-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
There is bug when mmap read event->count with large PEBS enabled.
Here is an example.
#./read_count
0x71f0
0x122c0
0x1000000001c54
0x100000001257d
0x200000000bdc5
There is auto-reload mechanism enabled for PEBS events in fixed period
mode. But the calculation of event->count does not take the auto-reload
values into account. Anyone who read the event->count will get wrong
result, e.g x86_pmu_read. Also, the calculation of hwc->period_left is
wrong either. It impacts the accuracy of period for the first record in
PEBS multiple records.
The issue is introduced with the auto-reload mechanism enabled by
commit 851559e35fd5 ("perf/x86/intel: Use the PEBS auto reload mechanism
when possible")
Introduce intel_pmu_save_and_restart_reload only for auto-reload.
The formula to calculate the event->count is as below.
event->count = period left from last time +
(reload_times - 1) * reload_val +
latency of PMI handler
prev_count is the last observed hardware counter value. Just the same as
non-auto-reload, its absolute value is the period of the first record.
It should not update with each reload. Because it doesn't 'observe' the
hardware counter for each auto-reload.
For the second and later records, the period is exactly the reload
value. Just need to simply add (reload_times - 1) * reload_val to
event->count.
The calculation of the latency of PMI handler is a little bit different
as non-auto-reload. Because the start point is -reload_value. It needs
to be adjusted by adding reload_value.
The period_left needs to do the same adjustment.
There is nothing need to do in x86_perf_event_set_period(). Because it
is fixed period. The period_left is already adjusted.
Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
---
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
index 3674a4b..cc1f373 100644
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
@@ -1251,17 +1251,82 @@ get_next_pebs_record_by_bit(void *base, void *top, int bit)
return NULL;
}
+/*
+ * Specific intel_pmu_save_and_restart() for auto-reload.
+ */
+static int intel_pmu_save_and_restart_reload(struct perf_event *event,
+ u64 reload_val,
+ int reload_times)
+{
+ struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
+ int shift = 64 - x86_pmu.cntval_bits;
+ u64 prev_raw_count, new_raw_count;
+ u64 delta;
+
+ if ((reload_times == 0) || (reload_val == 0))
+ return intel_pmu_save_and_restart(event);
+
+ /*
+ * Careful: an NMI might modify the previous event value.
+ *
+ * Our tactic to handle this is to first atomically read and
+ * exchange a new raw count - then add that new-prev delta
+ * count to the generic event atomically:
+ */
+again:
+ prev_raw_count = local64_read(&hwc->prev_count);
+ rdpmcl(hwc->event_base_rdpmc, new_raw_count);
+
+ if (local64_cmpxchg(&hwc->prev_count, prev_raw_count,
+ new_raw_count) != prev_raw_count)
+ goto again;
+
+ /*
+ * Now we have the new raw value and have updated the prev
+ * timestamp already. We can now calculate the elapsed delta
+ * (event-)time and add that to the generic event.
+ *
+ * Careful, not all hw sign-extends above the physical width
+ * of the count.
+ *
+ * event->count = period left from last time +
+ * (reload_times - 1) * reload_val +
+ * latency of PMI handler
+ * The period left from last time can be got from -prev_count.
+ * The start points of counting is always -reload_val.
+ * So the real latency of PMI handler is reload_val + new_raw_count.
+ */
+ delta = (reload_val << shift) + (new_raw_count << shift) -
+ (prev_raw_count << shift);
+ delta >>= shift;
+
+ local64_add(reload_val * (reload_times - 1), &event->count);
+ local64_add(delta, &event->count);
+ local64_sub(delta, &hwc->period_left);
+
+ return x86_perf_event_set_period(event);
+}
+
static void __intel_pmu_pebs_event(struct perf_event *event,
struct pt_regs *iregs,
void *base, void *top,
int bit, int count)
{
+ struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
struct perf_sample_data data;
struct pt_regs regs;
void *at = get_next_pebs_record_by_bit(base, top, bit);
- if (!intel_pmu_save_and_restart(event) &&
- !(event->hw.flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_AUTO_RELOAD))
+ if (hwc->flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_AUTO_RELOAD) {
+ /*
+ * Now, auto-reload is only enabled in fixed period mode.
+ * The reload value is always hwc->sample_period.
+ * May need to change it, if auto-reload is enabled in
+ * freq mode later.
+ */
+ intel_pmu_save_and_restart_reload(event, hwc->sample_period,
+ count);
+ } else if (!intel_pmu_save_and_restart(event))
return;
while (count > 1) {
--
2.7.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-20 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-20 19:42 [PATCH V2 0/4] bug fix mmap read and rdpmc read in large PEBS kan.liang
2017-12-20 19:42 ` kan.liang [this message]
2017-12-20 19:42 ` [PATCH V2 2/4] perf/x86: introduce read function for x86_pmu kan.liang
2017-12-20 19:42 ` [PATCH V2 3/4] perf/x86/intel: drain PEBS buffer in event read kan.liang
2017-12-20 19:42 ` [PATCH V2 4/4] perf/x86: fix: disable userspace RDPMC usage for large PEBS kan.liang
2017-12-20 21:41 ` Andi Kleen
2017-12-20 22:05 ` Liang, Kan
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=1513798971-4257-2-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--to=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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
Powered by JetHome