linux-kernel - Re: [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 09/11] x86: pmu: Improve LLC misses event verification

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: <ea33d2fa-6e69-4904-b5fd-ecec67e43352@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 23:20:09 +0800
From: "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@...el.com>
To: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org"
	<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Zhang, Xiong Y" <xiong.y.zhang@...el.com>, Mingwei Zhang
	<mizhang@...gle.com>, Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>, Jinrong Liang
	<cloudliang@...cent.com>, "Mi, Dapeng1" <dapeng1.mi@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests Patch v3 09/11] x86: pmu: Improve LLC misses
 event verification

On 1/3/2024 11:14 AM, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> When running pmu test on SPR, sometimes the following failure is
> reported.
>
> 1 <= 0 <= 1000000
> FAIL: Intel: llc misses-4
>
> Currently The LLC misses occurring only depends on probability. It's
> possible that there is no LLC misses happened in the whole loop(),
> especially along with processors have larger and larger cache size just
> like what we observed on SPR.
>
> Thus, add clflush instruction into the loop() asm blob and ensure once
> LLC miss is triggered at least.
>
> Suggested-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>   x86/pmu.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>   1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/x86/pmu.c b/x86/pmu.c
> index b764827c1c3d..8fd3db0fbf81 100644
> --- a/x86/pmu.c
> +++ b/x86/pmu.c
> @@ -20,19 +20,21 @@
>   
>   // Instrustion number of LOOP_ASM code
>   #define LOOP_INSTRNS	10
> -#define LOOP_ASM					\
> +#define LOOP_ASM(_clflush)				\
> +	_clflush "\n\t"                                 \
> +	"mfence;\n\t"                                   \
>   	"1: mov (%1), %2; add $64, %1;\n\t"		\
>   	"nop; nop; nop; nop; nop; nop; nop;\n\t"	\
>   	"loop 1b;\n\t"
>   
> -/*Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL instructions */
> -#define PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS  (2 + 4)
> +/*Enable GLOBAL_CTRL + disable GLOBAL_CTRL + clflush/mfence instructions */
> +#define PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS  (2 + 4 + 2)
>   #define PRECISE_LOOP_INSTRNS   (N * LOOP_INSTRNS + PRECISE_EXTRA_INSTRNS)
>   #define PRECISE_LOOP_BRANCHES  (N)
> -#define PRECISE_LOOP_ASM						\
> +#define PRECISE_LOOP_ASM(_clflush)					\
>   	"wrmsr;\n\t"							\
>   	"mov %%ecx, %%edi; mov %%ebx, %%ecx;\n\t"			\
> -	LOOP_ASM							\
> +	LOOP_ASM(_clflush)						\
>   	"mov %%edi, %%ecx; xor %%eax, %%eax; xor %%edx, %%edx;\n\t"	\
>   	"wrmsr;\n\t"
>   
> @@ -72,14 +74,30 @@ char *buf;
>   static struct pmu_event *gp_events;
>   static unsigned int gp_events_size;
>   
> +#define _loop_asm(_clflush)					\
> +do {								\
> +	asm volatile(LOOP_ASM(_clflush)				\
> +		     : "=c"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)	\
> +		     : "0"(N), "1"(buf));			\
> +} while (0)
> +
> +#define _precise_loop_asm(_clflush)				\
> +do {								\
> +	asm volatile(PRECISE_LOOP_ASM(_clflush)			\
> +		     : "=b"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)	\
> +		     : "a"(eax), "d"(edx), "c"(global_ctl),	\
> +		       "0"(N), "1"(buf)				\
> +		     : "edi");					\
> +} while (0)
>   
>   static inline void __loop(void)
>   {
>   	unsigned long tmp, tmp2, tmp3;

Can you move these tmp variables into macro's do...while block since they're not
needed here?

>   
> -	asm volatile(LOOP_ASM
> -		     : "=c"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)
> -		     : "0"(N), "1"(buf));
> +	if (this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSH))
> +		_loop_asm("clflush (%1)");
> +	else
> +		_loop_asm("nop");
>   }
>   
>   /*
> @@ -96,11 +114,10 @@ static inline void __precise_count_loop(u64 cntrs)
>   	u32 eax = cntrs & (BIT_ULL(32) - 1);
>   	u32 edx = cntrs >> 32;

Ditto.

>   
> -	asm volatile(PRECISE_LOOP_ASM
> -		     : "=b"(tmp), "=r"(tmp2), "=r"(tmp3)
> -		     : "a"(eax), "d"(edx), "c"(global_ctl),
> -		       "0"(N), "1"(buf)
> -		     : "edi");
> +	if (this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSH))
> +		_precise_loop_asm("clflush (%1)");
> +	else
> +		_precise_loop_asm("nop");
>   }
>   
>   static inline void loop(u64 cntrs)