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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALMp9eR2jWM3_4EPWS+EXY=7b-hJyZGg2nh1sq0iaVd0kDFjZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 4 Nov 2023 06:00:58 -0700
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>,
        Like Xu <likexu@...cent.com>,
        Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 08/20] KVM: selftests: Extend {kvm,this}_pmu_has() to
 support fixed counters

On Fri, Nov 3, 2023 at 5:02 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Extend the kvm_x86_pmu_feature framework to allow querying for fixed
> counters via {kvm,this}_pmu_has().  Like architectural events, checking
> for a fixed counter annoyingly requires checking multiple CPUID fields, as
> a fixed counter exists if:
>
>   FxCtr[i]_is_supported := ECX[i] || (EDX[4:0] > i);
>
> Note, KVM currently doesn't actually support exposing fixed counters via
> the bitmask, but that will hopefully change sooner than later, and Intel's
> SDM explicitly "recommends" checking both the number of counters and the
> mask.
>
> Rename the intermedate "anti_feature" field to simply 'f' since the fixed
> counter bitmask (thankfully) doesn't have reversed polarity like the
> architectural events bitmask.
>
> Note, ideally the helpers would use BUILD_BUG_ON() to assert on the
> incoming register, but the expected usage in PMU tests can't guarantee the
> inputs are compile-time constants.
>
> Opportunistically define macros for all of the architectural events and
> fixed counters that KVM currently supports.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> ---
>  .../selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h  | 63 +++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h
> index 2d9771151dd9..b103c462701b 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h
> @@ -281,24 +281,39 @@ struct kvm_x86_cpu_property {
>   * that indicates the feature is _not_ supported, and a property that states
>   * the length of the bit mask of unsupported features.  A feature is supported
>   * if the size of the bit mask is larger than the "unavailable" bit, and said
> - * bit is not set.
> + * bit is not set.  Fixed counters also bizarre enumeration, but inverted from
> + * arch events for general purpose counters.  Fixed counters are supported if a
> + * feature flag is set **OR** the total number of fixed counters is greater
> + * than index of the counter.
>   *
> - * Wrap the "unavailable" feature to simplify checking whether or not a given
> - * architectural event is supported.
> + * Wrap the events for general purpose and fixed counters to simplify checking
> + * whether or not a given architectural event is supported.
>   */
>  struct kvm_x86_pmu_feature {
> -       struct kvm_x86_cpu_feature anti_feature;
> +       struct kvm_x86_cpu_feature f;
>  };
> -#define        KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(__bit)                                              \
> -({                                                                             \
> -       struct kvm_x86_pmu_feature feature = {                                  \
> -               .anti_feature = KVM_X86_CPU_FEATURE(0xa, 0, EBX, __bit),        \
> -       };                                                                      \
> -                                                                               \
> -       feature;                                                                \
> +#define        KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(__reg, __bit)                               \
> +({                                                                     \
> +       struct kvm_x86_pmu_feature feature = {                          \
> +               .f = KVM_X86_CPU_FEATURE(0xa, 0, __reg, __bit),         \
> +       };                                                              \
> +                                                                       \
> +       kvm_static_assert(KVM_CPUID_##__reg == KVM_CPUID_EBX ||         \
> +                         KVM_CPUID_##__reg == KVM_CPUID_ECX);          \
> +       feature;                                                        \
>  })
>
> -#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_BRANCH_INSNS_RETIRED   KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(5)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_CPU_CYCLES             KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(EBX, 0)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_INSNS_RETIRED          KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(EBX, 1)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_REFERENCE_CYCLES       KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(EBX, 2)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_LLC_REFERENCES         KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(EBX, 3)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_LLC_MISSES             KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(EBX, 4)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_BRANCH_INSNS_RETIRED   KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(EBX, 5)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_BRANCHES_MISPREDICTED  KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(EBX, 6)

Why not add top down slots now?

> +
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_INSNS_RETIRED_FIXED    KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(ECX, 0)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_CPU_CYCLES_FIXED       KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(ECX, 1)
> +#define X86_PMU_FEATURE_REFERENCE_CYCLES_FIXED KVM_X86_PMU_FEATURE(ECX, 2)

Perhaps toss 'TSC' between CYCLES and FIXED?

And add top down slots now>

>
>  static inline unsigned int x86_family(unsigned int eax)
>  {
> @@ -697,10 +712,16 @@ static __always_inline bool this_cpu_has_p(struct kvm_x86_cpu_property property)
>
>  static inline bool this_pmu_has(struct kvm_x86_pmu_feature feature)
>  {
> -       uint32_t nr_bits = this_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_EBX_BIT_VECTOR_LENGTH);
> +       uint32_t nr_bits;
>
> -       return nr_bits > feature.anti_feature.bit &&
> -              !this_cpu_has(feature.anti_feature);
> +       if (feature.f.reg == KVM_CPUID_EBX) {
> +               nr_bits = this_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_EBX_BIT_VECTOR_LENGTH);
> +               return nr_bits > feature.f.bit && !this_cpu_has(feature.f);

Ouch! Reverse polarity bits make 'this_cpu_has' non-intuitive.

> +       }
> +
> +       GUEST_ASSERT(feature.f.reg == KVM_CPUID_ECX);
> +       nr_bits = this_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_NR_FIXED_COUNTERS);
> +       return nr_bits > feature.f.bit || this_cpu_has(feature.f);
>  }
>
>  static __always_inline uint64_t this_cpu_supported_xcr0(void)
> @@ -916,10 +937,16 @@ static __always_inline bool kvm_cpu_has_p(struct kvm_x86_cpu_property property)
>
>  static inline bool kvm_pmu_has(struct kvm_x86_pmu_feature feature)
>  {
> -       uint32_t nr_bits = kvm_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_EBX_BIT_VECTOR_LENGTH);
> +       uint32_t nr_bits;
>
> -       return nr_bits > feature.anti_feature.bit &&
> -              !kvm_cpu_has(feature.anti_feature);
> +       if (feature.f.reg == KVM_CPUID_EBX) {
> +               nr_bits = kvm_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_EBX_BIT_VECTOR_LENGTH);
> +               return nr_bits > feature.f.bit && !kvm_cpu_has(feature.f);
> +       }
> +
> +       TEST_ASSERT_EQ(feature.f.reg, KVM_CPUID_ECX);
> +       nr_bits = kvm_cpu_property(X86_PROPERTY_PMU_NR_FIXED_COUNTERS);
> +       return nr_bits > feature.f.bit || kvm_cpu_has(feature.f);
>  }
>
>  static __always_inline uint64_t kvm_cpu_supported_xcr0(void)
> --
> 2.42.0.869.gea05f2083d-goog
>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ