mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Chen, Zide" <zide.chen@intel.com>
To: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Eranian Stephane <eranian@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
	Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>,
	Falcon Thomas <thomas.falcon@intel.com>,
	Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@intel.com>, Yi Lai <yi1.lai@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] perf/x86/intel: Drop fixed-counter PEBS constraints for baseline PEBS
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 15:32:19 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <350ebaf7-91b1-4550-be4d-a07a96c4a955@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260605011136.2043393-8-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>



On 6/4/2026 8:11 PM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> On SPR guests where pebs_baseline is not advertised, running:
> 
> $ ./perf record -e cpu/event=0x00,umask=0x01,i\
> 	 name=INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST/p -c 10000 sleep 1
> 
> can trigger:
> 
> unchecked MSR access error: WRMSR to 0x3f1 ... in\
> 	 intel_pmu_pebs_enable_all()
> 
> Root cause:
> SPR-specific PEBS constraints allow fixed-counter scheduling,
> for example INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST on fixed counter 0. In guests without
> pebs_baseline, KVM does not support PEBS sampling on fixed counters,
> so enabling such events reaches an invalid MSR programming path.
> 
> Fix:
> Drop fixed-counter entries from the PEBS constraint table. Without
> pebs_baseline, those fixed-counter PEBS events now resolve to empty
> constraints and are not scheduled/enabled, avoiding the warning and the
> broken guest PEBS path.

Seems this exposes a more general issue: constraints derived from
host capabilities may not be applicable to a guest, since the guest may
only has a subset of the host capabilities.

For example, an event could be constrained to GP counter 7, while that
counter is not exposed to the guest. Currently this is not gated and
failures may only surface later during event programming.

Instead of dropping the constraints, should we validate counter
availability in intel_pebs_constraints() or
intel_get_event_constraints(), etc., and in a more generic way?


> This is safe because, in pebs_baseline-capable cases, PEBS constraint
> lookup already falls back to non-PEBS constraints when needed, and
> fixed-counter constraints are effectively shared there.

Can it really be removed without any consequences?

If it is architecturally required that INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST must run
on fixed counter 0, then the constraint should be preserved. I think.


> Reported-by: Yi Lai <yi1.lai@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 13 -------------
>  1 file changed, 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> index cb72af9b61ce..5db15a92017a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> @@ -1447,10 +1447,6 @@ struct event_constraint intel_skl_pebs_event_constraints[] = {
>  };
>  
>  struct event_constraint intel_icl_pebs_event_constraints[] = {
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x01c0, 0x100000000ULL),	/* old INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST */
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x0100, 0x100000000ULL),	/* INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST */
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x0400, 0x800000000ULL),	/* SLOTS */
> -
>  	INTEL_PLD_CONSTRAINT(0x1cd, 0xff),			/* MEM_TRANS_RETIRED.LOAD_LATENCY */
>  	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT_DATALA_LD(0x11d0, 0xf),	/* MEM_INST_RETIRED.STLB_MISS_LOADS */
>  	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT_DATALA_ST(0x12d0, 0xf),	/* MEM_INST_RETIRED.STLB_MISS_STORES */
> @@ -1473,9 +1469,6 @@ struct event_constraint intel_icl_pebs_event_constraints[] = {
>  };
>  
>  struct event_constraint intel_glc_pebs_event_constraints[] = {
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x100, 0x100000000ULL),	/* INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST */
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x0400, 0x800000000ULL),
> -
>  	INTEL_FLAGS_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0xc0, 0xfe),
>  	INTEL_PLD_CONSTRAINT(0x1cd, 0xfe),
>  	INTEL_PSD_CONSTRAINT(0x2cd, 0x1),
> @@ -1500,9 +1493,6 @@ struct event_constraint intel_glc_pebs_event_constraints[] = {
>  };
>  
>  struct event_constraint intel_lnc_pebs_event_constraints[] = {
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x100, 0x100000000ULL),	/* INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST */
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x0400, 0x800000000ULL),
> -
>  	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x012a, 0x1),		/* OCR.* events */
>  	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x012b, 0x1),		/* OCR.* events */
>  
> @@ -1534,9 +1524,6 @@ struct event_constraint intel_lnc_pebs_event_constraints[] = {
>  };
>  
>  struct event_constraint intel_pnc_pebs_event_constraints[] = {
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x100, 0x100000000ULL),	/* INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST */
> -	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x0400, 0x800000000ULL),
> -
>  	INTEL_HYBRID_LDLAT_CONSTRAINT(0x1cd, 0xfc),
>  	INTEL_HYBRID_STLAT_CONSTRAINT(0x2cd, 0x3),
>  	INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT_DATALA_LD(0x11d0, 0xf),	/* MEM_INST_RETIRED.STLB_MISS_LOADS */


  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-05 20:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-05  1:11 [PATCH 0/8] perf/x86: Miscellaneous PMU bug fixes Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05  1:11 ` [PATCH 1/8] perf/x86/intel: Remove anythread_deprecated bit from perf_capabilities Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05 17:04   ` Falcon, Thomas
2026-06-08  1:37     ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-05  1:11 ` [PATCH 2/8] perf/x86: Introduce is_x86_pmu() helper Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05 17:08   ` Falcon, Thomas
2026-06-05  1:11 ` [PATCH 3/8] perf/x86: Update cap_user_rdpmc base on rdpmc user disable state Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05 17:15   ` Falcon, Thomas
2026-06-05  1:11 ` [PATCH 4/8] perf/x86/intel: Fix redundant branch type check in intel_pmu_lbr_filter() Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05 18:28   ` Falcon, Thomas
2026-06-08  1:56     ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-08  6:15       ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-05  1:11 ` [PATCH 5/8] perf/x86/intel: Fix kernel address leakages in LBR stack Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05  1:11 ` [PATCH 6/8] perf/x86/intel: Validate return value of intel_pmu_init_hybrid() Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05 16:17   ` Chen, Zide
2026-06-08  2:48     ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-05 18:47   ` Falcon, Thomas
2026-06-05  1:11 ` [PATCH 7/8] perf/x86/intel: Drop fixed-counter PEBS constraints for baseline PEBS Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05 20:32   ` Chen, Zide [this message]
2026-06-08  2:46     ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-08 15:46       ` Chen, Zide
2026-06-09  0:36         ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-06-05  1:11 ` [PATCH 8/8] perf/core: Fix kernel register info leak via hardware skid Dapeng Mi
2026-06-05 19:08   ` Falcon, Thomas
2026-06-08  2:47     ` Mi, Dapeng

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=350ebaf7-91b1-4550-be4d-a07a96c4a955@intel.com \
    --to=zide.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dapeng1.mi@intel.com \
    --cc=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=thomas.falcon@intel.com \
    --cc=xudong.hao@intel.com \
    --cc=yi1.lai@intel.com \
    /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