linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] perf,x86: add Intel RAPL PMU support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CABPqkBTtMyxA4-n0ExQ5Q0HjwW94h_qiON--92n2SVyHZ4E2fw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:54:26 +0100
From:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	"Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] perf,x86: add Intel RAPL PMU support

Peter,

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:33:50AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> If we have that, then it may not be necessary anymore
>> to express the raw count in the 1/2^32 J unit like we
>> are currently doing. This loses a bit of precision. We
>> could as well expose the actual raw count and export
>> the actual unit via sysfs. For instance, on SNB/IVB the
>> unit is 1/2^16, but on Haswell it is 1/2^14.
>
> 2^-32 can losslessly express both 2^-16 and 2^-14.
>
> Notably: 2^18/2^32 = 2^(18-32) = 2^-14.
>
> So no, 2^-32 does not loose precision.
>
You are correct. No bits are lost.

> The only side effect of always using 2^-32 is that we can only maximally
> represent 2^32 (from 64-32), whereas when using 2^-14 we could maximally
> represent 2^50.
>
> That said; 2^32 Joule ~ 4.2 GJ which is a rather large quantity of
> energy; one I would hope is out there when measuring package energy
> costs over any reasonable amount of time.
>
> So the only reason to switch away from using the 32.32 fixed point would
> be if someone can make a reasonable argument for why 4.2 GJ is not
> sufficient and they need 1 PJ (yes, peta-joule, as in we need a private
> nuclear reactor to power this CPU).

I think we are fine with what we have. Simple, no precision lost, constant
user-visible scaling factor easy to export as a string to user tools. Comparison
of raw count possible directly.

I will post v4 very soon.
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/