| 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: <54dafedb-a96b-4e10-8a89-24e843962c24@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 10:49:59 -0400
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
acme@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
jolsa@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ravi.bangoria@....com, sandipan.das@....com, atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
luogengkun@...weicloud.com, ak@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf: New start period for the freq mode
On 2024-08-30 2:13 a.m., Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Kan,
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 08:20:36AM -0700, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> The freq mode is the current default mode of Linux perf. 1 period is
>> used as a start period. The period is auto-adjusted in each tick or an
>> overflow to meet the frequency target.
>>
>> The start period 1 is too low and may trigger some issues.
>> - Many HWs do not support period 1 well.
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/875xs2oh69.ffs@tglx/
>> - For an event that occurs frequently, period 1 is too far away from the
>> real period. Lots of the samples are generated at the beginning.
>> The distribution of samples may not be even.
>>
>> It's hard to find a universal start period for all events. The idea is
>> only to give an estimate for the popular HW and HW cache events. For the
>> rest of the events, start from the lowest possible recommended value.
>>
>> Only the Intel event list JSON file provides the recommended SAV
>> (sample after value) for each event. The estimation is based on the
>> Intel's SAV.
>>
>> This patch implements a generic perf_freq_start_period() which impacts
>> all ARCHs.
>> If the other ARCHs don't like the start period, a per-pmu
>> (*freq_start_period) may be introduced instead. Or make it a __weak
>> function.
>> The other option would be exposing a start_period knob in the sysfs or a
>> per-event config. So the end users can set their preferred start period.
>> Please let me know your thoughts.
>>
>> SW events may need to be specially handled, which is not implemented in
>> the patch.
>
> Sounds like a per-pmu callback is fine. PMUs don't have the callback
> (including SW) can use 1 same as of now.
I once hope the new start period can benefit more ARCHs. But yes, a
per-pmu setting should be more practical.
Thanks,
Kan
>
> Thanks,
> Namhyung
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/events/core.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
>> index 4b855b018a79..7a028474caef 100644
>> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
>> @@ -12017,6 +12017,69 @@ static void account_event(struct perf_event *event)
>> account_pmu_sb_event(event);
>> }
>>
>> +static u64 perf_freq_start_period(struct perf_event *event)
>> +{
>> + int type = event->attr.type;
>> + u64 config, factor;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * The 127 is the lowest possible recommended SAV (sample after value)
>> + * for a 4000 freq (default freq), according to Intel event list JSON
>> + * file, which is the only JSON file that provides a recommended value.
>> + */
>> + factor = 127 * 4000;
>> + if (type != PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE && type != PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE)
>> + goto end;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * The estimation of the start period in the freq mode is
>> + * based on the below assumption.
>> + *
>> + * For a cycles or an instructions event, 1GHZ of the
>> + * underlying platform, 1 IPC. The workload is idle 50% time.
>> + * The start period = 1,000,000,000 * 1 / freq / 2.
>> + * = 500,000,000 / freq
>> + *
>> + * Usually, the branch-related events occur less than the
>> + * instructions event. According to the Intel event list JSON
>> + * file, the SAV (sample after value) of a branch-related event
>> + * is usually 1/4 of an instruction event.
>> + * The start period of branch-related events = 125,000,000 / freq.
>> + *
>> + * The cache-related events occurs even less. The SAV is usually
>> + * 1/20 of an instruction event.
>> + * The start period of cache-related events = 25,000,000 / freq.
>> + */
>> + config = event->attr.config & PERF_HW_EVENT_MASK;
>> + if (type == PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE) {
>> + switch (config) {
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_CPU_CYCLES:
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_INSTRUCTIONS:
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_BUS_CYCLES:
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_STALLED_CYCLES_FRONTEND:
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_STALLED_CYCLES_BACKEND:
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_REF_CPU_CYCLES:
>> + factor = 500000000;
>> + break;
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_BRANCH_INSTRUCTIONS:
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_BRANCH_MISSES:
>> + factor = 125000000;
>> + break;
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_REFERENCES:
>> + case PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_MISSES:
>> + factor = 25000000;
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + goto end;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE)
>> + factor = 25000000;
>> +end:
>> + return DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(factor, event->attr.sample_freq);
>> +}
>> +
>> /*
>> * Allocate and initialize an event structure
>> */
>> @@ -12140,7 +12203,7 @@ perf_event_alloc(struct perf_event_attr *attr, int cpu,
>> hwc = &event->hw;
>> hwc->sample_period = attr->sample_period;
>> if (attr->freq && attr->sample_freq)
>> - hwc->sample_period = 1;
>> + hwc->sample_period = perf_freq_start_period(event);
>> hwc->last_period = hwc->sample_period;
>>
>> local64_set(&hwc->period_left, hwc->sample_period);
>> --
>> 2.38.1
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists