Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/17] x86/resctrl : Support AMD Assignable Bandwidth Monitoring Counters (ABMC)

["Moger, Babu" <babu.moger@amd.com>]

Hi Peter,


On 4/4/24 14:08, Peter Newman wrote:
> Hi Babu,
> 
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 6:07 PM Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com> wrote:
>>    The list follows the following format:
>>
>>        * Default CTRL_MON group:
>>                "//<domain_id>=<assignment_flags>"
>>
>>        * Non-default CTRL_MON group:
>>                "<CTRL_MON group>//<domain_id>=<assignment_flags>"
>>
>>        * Child MON group of default CTRL_MON group:
>>                "/<MON group>/<domain_id>=<assignment_flags>"
>>
>>        * Child MON group of non-default CTRL_MON group:
>>                "<CTRL_MON group>/<MON group>/<domain_id>=<assignment_flags>"
>>
>>        Assignment flags can be one of the following:
>>
>>         t  MBM total event is assigned
>>         l  MBM local event is assigned
>>         tl Both total and local MBM events are assigned
>>         _  None of the MBM events are assigned
>>
>>         Examples:
>>
>>         # cat /sys/fs/resctrl/info/L3_MON/mbm_assign_control
>>         non_defult_group//0=tl;1=tl;2=tl;3=tl;4=tl;5=tl;6=tl;7=tl;
>>         non_defult_group/non_default_mon1/0=tl;1=tl;2=tl;3=tl;4=tl;5=tl;6=tl;7=tl;
>>         //0=tl;1=tl;2=tl;3=tl;4=tl;5=tl;6=tl;7=tl;
>>         /default_mon1/0=tl;1=tl;2=tl;3=tl;4=tl;5=tl;6=tl;7=tl;
>>
>>         There are four groups and all the groups have local and total event assigned.
>>
>>         "//" - This is a default CONTROL MON group
>>
>>         "non_defult_group//" - This is non default CONTROL MON group
>>
>>         "/default_mon1/"  - This is Child MON group of the defult group
>>
>>         "non_defult_group/non_default_mon1/" - This is child MON group of the non default group
>>
>>         =tl means both total and local events are assigned.
> 
> I recall there was supposed to be a way to perform the same update on
> all domains together so that it isn't tedious to not do per-domain

Yes. Correct. Reinette suggested to have "no domains" means ALL the domains.

Example:

Initial list:
$cat /sys/fs/resctrl/info/L3_MON/mbm_assign_control
non_def_ctrl_mon_grep//0=_;1=_;2=_;3=_;4=_;5=_;6=_;7=_;
//0=_;1=_;2=_;3=_;4=_;5=_;6=_;7=_;

Two groups and no events assigned.


To assign total event on all the domains, The command will look like this.

$ echo "//=t" > /sys/fs/resctrl/info/L3_MON/mbm_assign_control

Parsing becomes ugly here. I look for domain number after the name. Now I
have add some ugly checks there.


I also thought about something like this:

$ echo "//FFFF=t" > /sys/fs/resctrl/info/L3_MON/mbm_assign_control

FFFF means all the domains. But there could be domain number with FFFF also.

So, I dropped the idea.


> customizations. (And also to avoid serializing programming all the
> domains the same way.)

One more thing with respect to domains:

This series updates all the domains when assignment is requested.
Makes it easy to implement.

For example:

$ echo "//0=t" > /sys/fs/resctrl/info/L3_MON/mbm_assign_control

This command will assign total event on all the domains on default group
even though user passed only domain 0.

I am looking at supporting domain specific assignment right now.
If your use case is specific to each domain then I can add that support in
in next revision.

> 
> 
>>
>>  .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt         |   2 +-
>>  Documentation/arch/x86/resctrl.rst            | 144 ++++
>>  arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h            |   1 +
>>  arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h              |   2 +
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpuid-deps.c              |   3 +
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/core.c            |  25 +-
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h        |  56 +-
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c         |  24 +-
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c        | 714 +++++++++++++++++-
>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c               |   1 +
>>  include/linux/resctrl.h                       |  12 +
>>  11 files changed, 964 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
> 
> This should be fine for me to get started with. I'll see if I can work
> backwards from the patches adding the parsing code to see how I'll
> work the software implementation in.
> 
> Thanks!
> -Peter

-- 
Thanks
Babu Moger