linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf vendor events arm64: AmpereOne/AmpereOneX: Mark LD

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: <6a88e749-51e1-fe61-5122-f4c046dd3485@os.amperecomputing.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 13:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka@...amperecomputing.com>
To: James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>
cc: Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka@...amperecomputing.com>, 
    linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, 
    linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, 
    Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, 
    Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>, 
    Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>, 
    Leo Yan <leo.yan@...ux.dev>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, 
    Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
    Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, 
    Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, 
    "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, 
    Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf vendor events arm64: AmpereOne/AmpereOneX: Mark
 LD_RETIRED impacted by errata


Hi James,

On Tue, 18 Mar 2025, James Clark wrote:
> On 13/03/2025 8:15 pm, Ilkka Koskinen wrote:
>> Atomic instructions are both memory-reading and memory-writing
>> instructions and so should be counted by both LD_RETIRED and ST_RETIRED
>> performance monitoring events. However LD_RETIRED does not count atomic
>> instructions.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka@...amperecomputing.com>
>> ---
>>   tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/ampere/ampereone/memory.json | 4 +++-
>>   .../perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/ampere/ampereonex/memory.json  | 4 +++-
>>   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/ampere/ampereone/memory.json 
>> b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/ampere/ampereone/memory.json
>> index 0711782bfa6b..13382d29b25f 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/ampere/ampereone/memory.json
>> +++ b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/ampere/ampereone/memory.json
>> @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
>>   [
>>       {
>> -        "ArchStdEvent": "LD_RETIRED"
>> +        "ArchStdEvent": "LD_RETIRED",
>> +        "Errata": "Errata AC03_CPU_52",
>> +        "BriefDescription": "Instruction architecturally executed, 
>> condition code check pass, load. Impacted by errata -"
>
> I think this could also have a 'Fixes:' tag, either way:
>
> Reviewed-by: James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>

Yeah, that's true. I guess, I was thinking about using 'Fixes' more on 
broken patches rather than when adding a patch dealing with a new hw 
errata. Well, given you're find with this, I don't think I'll resubmit it
with a Fixes tag this time.

Cheers, Ilkka