linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: qcom: add l2 cache perf events driver

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: <7a8fd879-6f0b-3b73-013f-99b12ba5729f@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jun 2016 18:34:04 -0400
From:	Neil Leeder <nleeder@...eaurora.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	WillDeacon <will.deacon@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Mark Langsdorf <mlangsdo@...hat.com>,
	Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>, cov@...eaurora.org,
	nleeder@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: qcom: add l2 cache perf events driver



On 6/9/2016 03:41 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 04:56:16PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>>> +static irqreturn_t l2_cache__handle_irq(int irq_num, void *data)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +	struct hml2_pmu *slice = data;
>>>>> +	u32 ovsr;
>>>>> +	int idx;
>>>>> +	struct pt_regs *regs;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	ovsr = hml2_pmu__getreset_ovsr();
>>>>> +	if (!hml2_pmu__has_overflowed(ovsr))
>>>>> +		return IRQ_NONE;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	regs = get_irq_regs();
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	for (idx = 0; idx < l2cache_pmu.num_counters; idx++) {
>>>>> +		struct perf_event *event = slice->events[idx];
>>>>> +		struct hw_perf_event *hwc;
>>>>> +		struct perf_sample_data data;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		if (!event)
>>>>> +			continue;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		if (!hml2_pmu__counter_has_overflowed(ovsr, idx))
>>>>> +			continue;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		l2_cache__event_update_from_slice(event, slice);
>>>>> +		hwc = &event->hw;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		if (is_sampling_event(event)) {
>>>>> +			perf_sample_data_init(&data, 0, hwc->last_period);
>>>>
>>>> I don't think sampling makes sense, given this is an uncore PMU and the
>>>> events are triggered by other CPUs.
>>>
>>> There is origin filtering so events can be attributed to a CPU when sampling.
>>
>> Ok. I believe that's different from all other uncore PMUs we support
>> (none of the drivers support sampling, certainly), so I'm not entirely
>> sure how/if we can make use of that sanely and reliably.
> 
> Right; because not only do you need to know which CPU originated the
> event, the IRQ must also happen on that CPU. Simply knowing which CPU
> triggered it is not enough for sampling.
> 
>> For the timebeing, I think this sampling needs to go, and the event_init
>> logic needs to reject sampling as with other uncore PMU drivers.
> 
> Agreed.

I want to make sure I understand what the concern is here.
Given the hardware filter which restricts counting to events generated by
a specific CPU, and an irq which is affine to that CPU, sampling and task mode
would seem to work for a single perf use. 
Is the issue only related to multiple concurrent perf uses?

> 
>> One thing I forgot to mention in my earlier comments is that as an
>> uncore PMU you need to have task_ctx_nr = perf_invalid_context here
>> also.
> 
> For good reasons, uncore PMUs (as is the case here) count strictly more
> than the effect of single CPUs (and thus also the current task). So
> attributing it back to a task is nonsense.
> 

Thanks,
Neil

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.