[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cfd0a622-89bc-4303-a972-4b5c8380eb76@amd.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:47:42 +0530
From: Dhananjay Ugwekar <Dhananjay.Ugwekar@....com>
To: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, kees@...nel.org, gustavoars@...nel.org
Cc: linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, ananth.narayan@....com,
gautham.shenoy@....com, kprateek.nayak@....com, ravi.bangoria@....com,
sandipan.das@....com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Add per-core RAPL energy counter support for AMD CPUs
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@...alenko.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.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists