| 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: <f085c624-c548-4dfb-833f-3b628d937aa9@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 09:30:52 +0800
From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>
To: Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@...gle.com>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
adrian.hunter@...el.com, james.clark@...aro.org, ravi.bangoria@....com,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf pmu intel: Adjust cpumaks for sub-NUMA clusters on
Emeraldrapids
On 1/15/2026 2:03 AM, Chun-Tse Shao wrote:
> Hi Dapeng,
>
> I set the SNC2 config to {0, 0, 1, 1} because that is how my EMR
> testing machine shows with SNC2 enabled. If that is true, I wonder if
> the SNC2 map for GNR is still {1, 1, 0, 0}.
Ok, let me find a GNR to double check it. (Maybe next week, I have some
higher priority things on my hand in this week). Thanks.
>
> Thanks,
> CT
>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 4:42 PM Mi, Dapeng <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 1/14/2026 2:06 AM, Chun-Tse Shao wrote:
>>> Ping.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your comment, Ian. To Intel team, can we get confirmation
>>> of the GNR SNR2 configuration?
>> It seems you missed Ian's comments.
>>
>> I have same question with Ian, the snc map for uncore IMC is changed. It
>> may not change the total count of uncore_imc events, but it would change
>> the count of the uncore_imc events for a specific SNC node. What's the
>> reason you did the change?
>>
>> I have no GNR/EMR on my hand, I can't check how the SNC nodes are mapped on
>> these 2 machines.
>>
>>
>>> -CT
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 11:19 AM Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:45 AM Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>>> Similar to GNR [1], Emeraldrapids supports sub-NUMA clusters as well.
>>>>> Adjust cpumasks as the logic for GNR in [1].
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested on Emeraldrapids with SNC2 enabled:
>>>>> $ perf stat --per-node -e 'UNC_CHA_CLOCKTICKS,UNC_M_CLOCKTICKS' -a -- sleep 1
>>>>>
>>>>> Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
>>>>>
>>>>> N0 30 72125876670 UNC_CHA_CLOCKTICKS
>>>>> N0 4 8815163648 UNC_M_CLOCKTICKS
>>>>> N1 30 72124958844 UNC_CHA_CLOCKTICKS
>>>>> N1 4 8815014974 UNC_M_CLOCKTICKS
>>>>> N2 30 72121049022 UNC_CHA_CLOCKTICKS
>>>>> N2 4 8814592626 UNC_M_CLOCKTICKS
>>>>> N3 30 72117133854 UNC_CHA_CLOCKTICKS
>>>>> N3 4 8814012840 UNC_M_CLOCKTICKS
>>>>>
>>>>> 1.001574118 seconds time elapsed
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] lore.kernel.org/20250515181417.491401-1-irogers@...gle.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@...gle.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> tools/perf/arch/x86/util/pmu.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>>> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/pmu.c b/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/pmu.c
>>>>> index a3f96221758d..fad68a0f7b5d 100644
>>>>> --- a/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/pmu.c
>>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/pmu.c
>>>>> @@ -22,20 +22,29 @@
>>>>> #include "util/env.h"
>>>>> #include "util/header.h"
>>>>>
>>>>> -static bool x86__is_intel_graniterapids(void)
>>>>> +static bool x86__is_snc_supported(void)
>>>>> {
>>>>> - static bool checked_if_graniterapids;
>>>>> - static bool is_graniterapids;
>>>>> + static bool checked_if_snc_supported;
>>>>> + static bool is_supported;
>>>>>
>>>>> - if (!checked_if_graniterapids) {
>>>>> - const char *graniterapids_cpuid = "GenuineIntel-6-A[DE]";
>>>>> + if (!checked_if_snc_supported) {
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* Emeraldrapids and Graniterapids support SNC configuration. */
>>>>> + static const char *const supported_cpuids[] = {
>>>>> + "GenuineIntel-6-CF", /* Emeraldrapids */
>>>>> + "GenuineIntel-6-A[DE]", /* Graniterapids */
>>>>> + };
>>>>> char *cpuid = get_cpuid_str((struct perf_cpu){0});
>>>>>
>>>>> - is_graniterapids = cpuid && strcmp_cpuid_str(graniterapids_cpuid, cpuid) == 0;
>>>>> + for (size_t i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(supported_cpuids); i++) {
>>>>> + is_supported = cpuid && strcmp_cpuid_str(supported_cpuids[i], cpuid) == 0;
>>>>> + if (is_supported)
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> free(cpuid);
>>>>> - checked_if_graniterapids = true;
>>>>> + checked_if_snc_supported = true;
>>>>> }
>>>>> - return is_graniterapids;
>>>>> + return checked_if_snc_supported;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> static struct perf_cpu_map *read_sysfs_cpu_map(const char *sysfs_path)
>>>>> @@ -64,6 +73,7 @@ static int snc_nodes_per_l3_cache(void)
>>>>> read_sysfs_cpu_map("devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cache/index3/shared_cpu_list");
>>>>>
>>>>> snc_nodes = perf_cpu_map__nr(cache_cpus) / perf_cpu_map__nr(node_cpus);
>>>>> +
>>>>> perf_cpu_map__put(cache_cpus);
>>>>> perf_cpu_map__put(node_cpus);
>>>>> checked_snc = true;
>>>>> @@ -137,8 +147,8 @@ static int uncore_imc_snc(struct perf_pmu *pmu)
>>>>> // Compute the IMC SNC using lookup tables.
>>>>> unsigned int imc_num;
>>>>> int snc_nodes = snc_nodes_per_l3_cache();
>>>>> - const u8 snc2_map[] = {1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0};
>>>>> - const u8 snc3_map[] = {1, 1, 0, 0, 2, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 2, 2};
>>>>> + const u8 snc2_map[] = {0, 0, 1, 1};
>>>> Does this alter the behavior on GNR? ie 1,1,0,0 vs 0,0,1,1.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Ian
>>>>
>>>>> + const u8 snc3_map[] = {1, 1, 0, 0, 2, 2};
>>>>> const u8 *snc_map;
>>>>> size_t snc_map_len;
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -161,11 +171,11 @@ static int uncore_imc_snc(struct perf_pmu *pmu)
>>>>> pr_warning("Unexpected: unable to compute IMC number '%s'\n", pmu->name);
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>> - if (imc_num >= snc_map_len) {
>>>>> + if (imc_num >= snc_map_len * perf_cpu_map__nr(pmu->cpus)) {
>>>>> pr_warning("Unexpected IMC %d for SNC%d mapping\n", imc_num, snc_nodes);
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>> - return snc_map[imc_num];
>>>>> + return snc_map[imc_num % snc_map_len];
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> static int uncore_cha_imc_compute_cpu_adjust(int pmu_snc)
>>>>> @@ -205,7 +215,7 @@ static int uncore_cha_imc_compute_cpu_adjust(int pmu_snc)
>>>>> return cpu_adjust[pmu_snc];
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> -static void gnr_uncore_cha_imc_adjust_cpumask_for_snc(struct perf_pmu *pmu, bool cha)
>>>>> +static void uncore_cha_imc_adjust_cpumask_for_snc(struct perf_pmu *pmu, bool cha)
>>>>> {
>>>>> // With sub-NUMA clustering (SNC) there is a NUMA node per SNC in the
>>>>> // topology. For example, a two socket graniterapids machine may be set
>>>>> @@ -304,11 +314,12 @@ void perf_pmu__arch_init(struct perf_pmu *pmu)
>>>>> pmu->mem_events = perf_mem_events_intel_aux;
>>>>> else
>>>>> pmu->mem_events = perf_mem_events_intel;
>>>>> - } else if (x86__is_intel_graniterapids()) {
>>>>> + } else if (x86__is_snc_supported()) {
>>>>> if (starts_with(pmu->name, "uncore_cha_"))
>>>>> - gnr_uncore_cha_imc_adjust_cpumask_for_snc(pmu, /*cha=*/true);
>>>>> - else if (starts_with(pmu->name, "uncore_imc_"))
>>>>> - gnr_uncore_cha_imc_adjust_cpumask_for_snc(pmu, /*cha=*/false);
>>>>> + uncore_cha_imc_adjust_cpumask_for_snc(pmu, /*cha=*/true);
>>>>> + else if (starts_with(pmu->name, "uncore_imc_") &&
>>>>> + !starts_with(pmu->name, "uncore_imc_free_running"))
>>>>> + uncore_cha_imc_adjust_cpumask_for_snc(pmu, /*cha=*/false);
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.52.0.457.g6b5491de43-goog
>>>>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists