| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20200223184915.GA22925@arm.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 18:49:15 +0000
From: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
maz@...nel.org, suzuki.poulose@....com, sudeep.holla@....com,
lukasz.luba@....com, rjw@...ysocki.net, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] arm64: use activity monitors for frequency
invariance
Hi Valentin,
Sorry for the delay in my reply and thank you very much for the review!
I will push v4 very soon with these changes.
On Monday 17 Feb 2020 at 16:59:24 (+0000), Valentin Schneider wrote:
> > + * Pre-compute the fixed ratio between the frequency of the constant
> > + * counter and the maximum frequency of the CPU.
> > + *
> > + * const_freq
> > + * arch_max_freq_scale = ---------------- * SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE²
> > + * cpuinfo_max_freq
> > + *
> > + * We use a factor of 2 * SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT -> SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE²
> > + * in order to ensure a good resolution for arch_max_freq_scale for
> > + * very low arch timer frequencies (up to the KHz range which should be
> ^^^^^
> <pedantic hat on>: s/up to/down to/
Done!
> > + * unlikely).
> > + */
> > + ratio = (u64)arch_timer_get_rate() << (2 * SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT);
> > + ratio = div64_u64(ratio, max_freq_hz);
> > + if (!ratio) {
> > + pr_err("System timer frequency too low.\n");
>
> Should that be a WARN_ONCE() instead? If the arch timer freq is too low,
> we'll end up spamming this message, since we go through this for all CPUs.
Done!
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + per_cpu(arch_max_freq_scale, cpu) = (unsigned long)ratio;
> > +
>
> It occurred to me that this isn't strictly speaking a per-CPU information as
> it only depends on the max possible frequency. Not really worth bothering
> about though, I think.
>
Yes, it depends on the max possible frequency of all CPUs in a frequency
domain. But I wanted to put this factor in a per-cpu variable in order
to be able to retrieve it faster in topology_scale_freq_tick, rather
than having to consider policies and related CPUs in that function.
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int
> > +enable_policy_freq_counters(int cpu, cpumask_var_t valid_cpus)
> > +{
> > + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
> > +
> > + if (!policy) {
> > + pr_debug("CPU%d: No cpufreq policy found.\n", cpu);
> > + return false;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (cpumask_subset(policy->related_cpus, valid_cpus)) {
> > + cpumask_or(amu_fie_cpus, policy->related_cpus,
> > + amu_fie_cpus);
> > + pr_info("CPUs[%*pbl]: counters will be used for FIE.",
> > + cpumask_pr_args(amu_fie_cpus));
>
> Could we have a single print of all CPUs in one go? AIUI this will generate a
> line per cpufreq policy. Maybe just something at the tail of init_amu_fie():
>
> if (!cpumask_empty(amu_fie_cpus))
> pr_info(<blah>);
>
Done. I've used this location as well to set the static key that you've
suggested below.
> > + }
> > +
> > + cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
> > +
> > + return true;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int __init init_amu_fie(void)
> > +{
> > + cpumask_var_t valid_cpus;
> > + bool have_policy = false;
> > + int cpu;
> > +
> > + if (!zalloc_cpumask_var(&valid_cpus, GFP_KERNEL) ||
> > + !zalloc_cpumask_var(&amu_fie_cpus, GFP_KERNEL))
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> > + if (validate_cpu_freq_invariance_counters(cpu))
> > + continue;
> > + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, valid_cpus);
> > + have_policy = enable_policy_freq_counters(cpu, valid_cpus) ||
> > + have_policy;
>
> What about:
> have_policy |= enable_policy_freq_counters(cpu, valid_cpus);
>
Done as well.
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!have_policy) {
> > + /*
> > + * If we are not restricted by cpufreq policies, we only enable
> > + * the use of the AMU feature for FIE if all CPUs support AMU.
> > + * Otherwise, enable_policy_freq_counters has already enabled
> > + * policy cpus.
> > + */
> > + if (cpumask_equal(valid_cpus, cpu_possible_mask)) {
>
> Mmm so I'm thinking what we want here is the cpu_present_mask rather than
> the possible one. This is very corner-casy, but I think that if we fail to
> boot a secondary, we'll have it possible but not present.
>
Yes, this is correct. It does depend on the stage it fails at: for
example if some feature checks fail, a CPU will not be marked in
cpu_present_mask (see cpu_die_early()), while the following will result
in possible == present.
---
[ 0.056524] EFI services will not be available.
[ 0.065690] smp: Bringing up secondary CPUs ...
[ 0.098010] psci: failed to boot CPU1 (-22)
[ 0.098037] CPU1: failed to boot: -22
[ 0.130290] psci: failed to boot CPU2 (-22)
[ 0.130315] CPU2: failed to boot: -22
[ 0.162568] psci: failed to boot CPU3 (-22)
[ 0.162594] CPU3: failed to boot: -22
[ 0.194890] Detected PIPT I-cache on CPU4
[ 0.194990] GICv3: CPU4: found redistributor 100 region
0:0x000000002f120000
[ 0.195046] GICv3: CPU4: using allocated LPI pending table
@0x00000000fc0d0000
[ 0.195133] CPU4: Booted secondary processor 0x0000000100
[0x410fd0f0]
[ 0.227190] psci: failed to boot CPU5 (-22)
[ 0.227412] CPU5: failed to boot: -22
[ 0.259431] psci: failed to boot CPU6 (-22)
[ 0.259522] CPU6: failed to boot: -22
[ 0.291683] psci: failed to boot CPU7 (-22)
[ 0.291709] CPU7: failed to boot: -22
[ 0.291990] smp: Brought up 1 node, 2 CPUs
[..]
root@...ldroot:~# cat present
0-7
root@...ldroot:~# cat possible
0-7
This failure happens while the CPU is being brought up (__cpu_up).
I'm not sure if this should result in set_cpu_present(cpu, 0) as well.
But it's unrelated to this..
In any case, your suggestion is valid and cpu_present_mask is better to
be used here.
> While at it you could make the loop only target present CPUs, but I think the
> one bit that matters is this check right here (!present should fail at
> validate_cpu_freq_invariance_counters()).
>
Will change the loop as well. Thanks!
> > + cpumask_or(amu_fie_cpus, amu_fie_cpus, valid_cpus);
> > + pr_info("CPUs[%*pbl]: counters will be used for FIE.",
> > + cpumask_pr_args(amu_fie_cpus));
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + free_cpumask_var(valid_cpus);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +late_initcall_sync(init_amu_fie);
> > +
> > +bool topology_cpu_freq_counters(struct cpumask *cpus)
> > +{
> > + return cpumask_available(amu_fie_cpus) &&
> > + cpumask_subset(cpus, amu_fie_cpus);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void topology_scale_freq_tick(void)
> > +{
> > + u64 prev_core_cnt, prev_const_cnt;
> > + u64 core_cnt, const_cnt, scale;
> > + int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> > +
> > + if (!cpumask_available(amu_fie_cpus) ||
> > + !cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, amu_fie_cpus))
> > + return;
>
> It might be a good idea to have a static key to gate our entry into this
> function - that way we can lessen our impact on older platforms (without AMUs)
> running a recent kernel with CONFIG_ARM64_AMU_EXTN=y.
>
> x86 does just that, if you look at their arch_scale_freq_tick()
> implementation. FWIW I don't think we should bother with playing with the
> key counter to count AMU-enabled CPUs, just enable it at startup if we have
> > 1 such CPU and let the cpumask drive the rest.
>
> In your check here, the static key check could replace the cpumask_available()
> check. The static key could also be used for topology_cpu_freq_counters().
>
Very good idea! Done as well. Yes, the counter (number of AMU enabled
CPUs) would not be of much help for the moment.
> > +
> > + const_cnt = read_sysreg_s(SYS_AMEVCNTR0_CONST_EL0);
> > + core_cnt = read_sysreg_s(SYS_AMEVCNTR0_CORE_EL0);
> > + prev_const_cnt = this_cpu_read(arch_const_cycles_prev);
> > + prev_core_cnt = this_cpu_read(arch_core_cycles_prev);
> > +
> > + if (unlikely(core_cnt <= prev_core_cnt ||
> > + const_cnt <= prev_const_cnt))
> > + goto store_and_exit;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * /\core arch_max_freq_scale
> > + * scale = ------- * --------------------
> > + * /\const SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE
> > + *
> > + * We shift by SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT (divide by SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE)
> > + * in order to compensate for the SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE² factor in
> > + * arch_max_freq_scale (used to ensure its resolution) while keeping
> > + * the scale value in the 0-SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE capacity range.
> > + */
>
> A simple "See validate_cpu_freq_invariance_counters() for details on the
> scale factor" would suffice wrt the shifting details.
>
Done!
Thank you,
Ionela.
> > + scale = core_cnt - prev_core_cnt;
> > + scale *= this_cpu_read(arch_max_freq_scale);
> > + scale = div64_u64(scale >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT,
> > + const_cnt - prev_const_cnt);
> > +
> > + scale = min_t(unsigned long, scale, SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE);
> > + this_cpu_write(freq_scale, (unsigned long)scale);
> > +
> > +store_and_exit:
> > + this_cpu_write(arch_core_cycles_prev, core_cnt);
> > + this_cpu_write(arch_const_cycles_prev, const_cnt);
> > +}
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_ARM64_AMU_EXTN */
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > index 1eb81f113786..1ab2b7503d63 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
> > @@ -29,6 +29,14 @@ void arch_set_freq_scale(struct cpumask *cpus, unsigned long cur_freq,
> > unsigned long scale;
> > int i;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * If the use of counters for FIE is enabled, just return as we don't
> > + * want to update the scale factor with information from CPUFREQ.
> > + * Instead the scale factor will be updated from arch_scale_freq_tick.
> > + */
> > + if (arch_cpu_freq_counters(cpus))
> > + return;
> > +
> > scale = (cur_freq << SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT) / max_freq;
> >
> > for_each_cpu(i, cpus)
> > diff --git a/include/linux/topology.h b/include/linux/topology.h
> > index eb2fe6edd73c..397aad6ae163 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/topology.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/topology.h
> > @@ -227,5 +227,12 @@ static inline const struct cpumask *cpu_cpu_mask(int cpu)
> > return cpumask_of_node(cpu_to_node(cpu));
> > }
> >
> > +#ifndef arch_cpu_freq_counters
> > +static __always_inline
> > +bool arch_cpu_freq_counters(struct cpumask *cpus)
> > +{
> > + return false;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> >
> > #endif /* _LINUX_TOPOLOGY_H */
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists