From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf/x86/rapl: Move the pmu allocation out of CPU hotplug
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 17:05:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed3c066f-5040-4573-a91f-3ee95014c951@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87msjes56x.ffs@tglx>
On 2024-10-08 4:36 p.m., Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08 2024 at 22:23, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 08 2024 at 16:10, Kan Liang wrote:
>>> On 2024-10-08 12:33 p.m., Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Sep 13 2024 at 10:10, kan liang wrote:
>>>>> +static void __init init_rapl_pmu(void)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct rapl_pmu *pmu;
>>>>> + s32 rapl_pmu_idx;
>>>>> + int cpu;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + cpus_read_lock();
>>>>> +
>>>>> + for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_online_mask) {
>>>>
>>>> How is that supposed to work, when not all CPUs are online when
>>>> init_rapl_pmus() is invoked?
>>>>
>>>
>>> RAPL is a module. The module_init() is called during do_initcalls(),
>>> which is after the smp_init(). The cpu_online_mask has been setup in the
>>> smp_init().
>>>
>>> I also patched the kernel to double check. The cpu_online_mask indeed
>>> shows all the online CPUs.
>>>
>>> [ 7.021212] smp: Brought up 1 node, 48 CPUs
>>> [ 7.021212] smpboot: Total of 48 processors activated (211200.00
>>> BogoMIPS)
>>> ... ...
>>> [ 16.557323] RAPL PMU: rapl_pmu_init: cpu_online_mask 0xffffffffffff
>>
>> 1) Start your kernel with maxcpus=2 (not recommended, but ...)
>> 2) Load the module
>> 3) Online the rest of the CPUs from userspace
>>
>> If your machine has more than one die you might be surprised...
Thanks. I will find a 2 sockets machine and give it a try.
>
> You can make this work because the new topology code allows you to
> retrieve the possible number of cores/dies/packages even when they have
> not been onlined yet.
>
Actually, I think the possible CPU mask should be good enough here. The
init_rapl_pmu() just intends to allocate the space for a pmu in each die.
The worst case of using a possible mask is that some space may be
wasted, when there is no online CPUs on a die. But it should be an
unusual case. It should be harmless.
Thanks,
Kan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-08 21:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-13 17:10 kan.liang
2024-09-13 17:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf/x86/rapl: Clean up cpumask and hotplug kan.liang
2024-10-08 16:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf/x86/rapl: Move the pmu allocation out of CPU hotplug Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-08 20:10 ` Liang, Kan
2024-10-08 20:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-08 20:36 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-10-08 21:05 ` Liang, Kan [this message]
2024-10-08 22:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=ed3c066f-5040-4573-a91f-3ee95014c951@linux.intel.com \
--to=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Dhananjay.Ugwekar@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®