| 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: <7eozim2xnepacnnkzxlbx34hib4otycnbn4dqymfziqou5lw5u@5xzpv3t7sxo3>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 11:55:51 -0800
From: Vanshidhar Konda <vanshikonda@...amperecomputing.com>
To: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, sumitg@...dia.com, sudeep.holla@....covm, will@...nel.org,
catalin.marinas@....com, viresh.kumar@...aro.org, rafael@...nel.org,
ionela.voinescu@....com, yang@...amperecomputing.com, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, lihuisong@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: Provide an AMU-based version of
arch_freq_get_on_cpu
Hello Beata,
I tested this patch based on the discussion in [1] on an AmpereOne
system when the system was mostly idle. The results below are when only
I applied the first patch in this series to the kernel. I noticed that
the frequency reported through scaling_cur_freq vs cpuinfo_cur_freq is
quite different for some cores. When the cores are loaded using
stress-ng, the scaling_cur_freq and cpuinfo_cur_freq values are quite
similar.
Applying the second patch in this series causes the difference between
scaling_cur_freq and cpuinfo_cur_freq to disappear, but calculating the
core frequency based on the feedback_ctrs shows that the value is
incorrect for both.
The kernel I compiled for testing is based on the Fedora 39 config file.
These configs seem relevant to the discussion:
CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON=y
# CONFIG_HZ_PERIODIC is not set
# CONFIG_NO_HZ_IDLE is not set
CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL=y
CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING_USER=y
# CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING_USER_FORCE is not set
CONFIG_NO_HZ=y
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20231212072617.14756-1-lihuisong@huawei.com/
Results:
cpu_num scaling_cur_freq cpuinfo_cur_freq
[11]: 1874560 1000000
[12]: 2056158 1385000
[13]: 1974146 1000000
[21]: 1587518 1000000
[23]: 1593376 1000000
..
.. skipping similar results for ~50 other cores for brevity
..
nohz_full=113-118
[113]: 1874560 1000000
[114]: 1968288 1000000
[115]: 1962430 1000000
[116]: 1871631 1000000
[117]: 1877489 1000000
[118]: 1877489 1000000
isolcpus=119-127
[119]: 2999296 1000000
[120]: 2999296 1000000
[121]: 2999296 1000000
[125]: 2999296 1000000
[126]: 2999296 1000000
[127]: 2999296 1000000
Thanks,
Vanshi
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 04:08:37PM +0000, Beata Michalska wrote:
>With the Frequency Invariance Engine (FIE) being already wired up with
>sched tick and making use of relevant (core counter and constant
>counter) AMU counters, getting the current frequency for a given CPU
>on supported platforms, can be achieved by utilizing the frequency scale
>factor which reflects an average CPU frequency for the last tick period
>length.
>
>Suggested-by: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>
>Signed-off-by: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@....com>
>Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>---
>
>Notes:
> Due to [1], if merged, there might be a need to modify the patch to
> accommodate changes [1] introduces:
>
> freq = cpufreq_get_hw_max_freq(cpu) >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT
> to
> freq = per_cpu(capacity_freq_ref, cpu); >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20231121154349.GA1938@willie-the-truck/T/#mcb018d076dbce6f60ed2779634a9b6ffe622641e
>
> arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
>
>diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
>index 615c1a20129f..ae2445f6e7da 100644
>--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
>+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
>@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
> #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> #include <linux/percpu.h>
>+#include <linux/sched/isolation.h>
>
> #include <asm/cpu.h>
> #include <asm/cputype.h>
>@@ -186,6 +187,44 @@ static void amu_scale_freq_tick(void)
> this_cpu_write(arch_freq_scale, (unsigned long)scale);
> }
>
>+unsigned int arch_freq_get_on_cpu(int cpu)
>+{
>+ unsigned int freq;
>+ u64 scale;
>+
>+ if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, amu_fie_cpus))
>+ return 0;
>+
>+ /*
>+ * For those CPUs that are in full dynticks mode, try an alternative
>+ * source for the counters (and thus freq scale),
>+ * if available for given policy
>+ */
>+ if (!housekeeping_cpu(cpu, HK_TYPE_TICK)) {
>+ struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>+ int ref_cpu = nr_cpu_ids;
>+
>+ if (cpumask_intersects(housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK),
>+ policy->cpus))
>+ ref_cpu = cpumask_nth_and(cpu, policy->cpus,
>+ housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK));
>+ cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>+ if (ref_cpu >= nr_cpu_ids)
>+ return 0;
>+ cpu = ref_cpu;
>+ }
>+
>+ /*
>+ * Reversed computation to the one used to determine
>+ * the arch_freq_scale value
>+ * (see amu_scale_freq_tick for details)
>+ */
>+ scale = per_cpu(arch_freq_scale, cpu);
>+ freq = cpufreq_get_hw_max_freq(cpu) >> SCHED_CAPACITY_SHIFT;
>+ freq *= scale;
>+ return freq;
>+}
>+
> static struct scale_freq_data amu_sfd = {
> .source = SCALE_FREQ_SOURCE_ARCH,
> .set_freq_scale = amu_scale_freq_tick,
>--
>2.25.1
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
>http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists