From: Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com>
To: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org,
namhyung@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
irogers@google.com, 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
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, ananth.narayan@amd.com,
gautham.shenoy@amd.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
ravi.bangoria@amd.com, sandipan.das@amd.com,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Add per-core RAPL energy counter support for AMD CPUs
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:47:42 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cfd0a622-89bc-4303-a972-4b5c8380eb76@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2733323.mvXUDI8C0e@natalenko.name>
Hello Oleksandr,
On 6/10/2024 7:58 PM, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On pondělí 10. června 2024 12:07:45, SELČ 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/
>>
>> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3e766f0e-37d4-0f82-3868-31b14228868d@linux.intel.com/
>>
>> This patchset applies cleanly on top of v6.10-rc3 as well as latest
>> tip/master.
>>
>> Dhananjay Ugwekar (6):
>> perf/x86/rapl: Fix the energy-pkg event for AMD CPUs
>> perf/x86/rapl: Rename rapl_pmu variables
>> perf/x86/rapl: Make rapl_model struct global
>> perf/x86/rapl: Move cpumask variable to rapl_pmus struct
>> perf/x86/rapl: Add wrapper for online/offline functions
>> perf/x86/rapl: Add per-core energy counter support for AMD CPUs
>>
>> arch/x86/events/rapl.c | 311 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>> 1 file changed, 233 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-)
>>
>>
>
> With my CPU:
>
> Model name: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-Core Processor
>
> and this workload:
>
> $ taskset -c 1 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null
>
> the following result is got:
>
> $ sudo perf stat -a --per-core -e power_per_core/energy-per-core/ sleep 1
>
> Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
>
> S0-D0-C0 1 1,70 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C1 1 8,83 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C2 1 0,17 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C3 1 0,33 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C4 1 0,14 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C5 1 0,33 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C6 1 0,25 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C7 1 0,19 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C8 1 0,66 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C9 1 1,71 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C10 1 0,38 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C11 1 1,69 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C12 1 0,22 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C13 1 0,11 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C14 1 0,49 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
> S0-D0-C15 1 0,37 Joules power_per_core/energy-per-core/
>
> 1,002409590 seconds time elapsed
>
> If it is as expected, please add my:
>
> Tested-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
We can see that after you affined the workload to cpu 1, energy
consumption of core 1 is considerably higher than the other cores,
which is as expected, will add your tested-by in next version.
P.S: I'm assuming here that cpu 1 is part of core 1 in your system,
please let me know if that assumption is wrong.
Thanks for testing the patch!
Regards,
Dhananjay
>
> Thank you.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-10 15:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-10 10:07 Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-10 10:07 ` [PATCH 1/6] perf/x86/rapl: Fix the energy-pkg event " Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-11 5:35 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-06-11 14:17 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-10 10:07 ` [PATCH 2/6] perf/x86/rapl: Rename rapl_pmu variables Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-11 5:43 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-06-11 8:33 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-10 10:07 ` [PATCH 3/6] perf/x86/rapl: Make rapl_model struct global Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-10 10:07 ` [PATCH 4/6] perf/x86/rapl: Move cpumask variable to rapl_pmus struct Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-10 10:07 ` [PATCH 5/6] perf/x86/rapl: Add wrapper for online/offline functions Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-10 10:07 ` [PATCH 6/6] perf/x86/rapl: Add per-core energy counter support for AMD CPUs Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-11 8:30 ` Zhang, Rui
2024-06-13 6:39 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar
2024-06-10 14:28 ` [PATCH 0/6] Add per-core RAPL " Oleksandr Natalenko
2024-06-10 15:17 ` Dhananjay Ugwekar [this message]
2024-06-10 18:08 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
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=cfd0a622-89bc-4303-a972-4b5c8380eb76@amd.com \
--to=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=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--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=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®