linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Raphael Gault <raphael.gault@arm.com>
Cc: raph.gault+kdev@gmail.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, acme@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] arm64: cpufeature: Add feature to detect heterogeneous systems
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:03:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190820160357.GC43412@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8cf12008-cc86-3872-7358-2e837cf2498a@arm.com>

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 04:55:24PM +0100, Raphael Gault wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Thank you for your comments.
> 
> On 8/20/19 4:49 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 04:23:17PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > Hi Raphael,
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 01:59:31PM +0100, Raphael Gault wrote:
> > > > This feature is required in order to enable PMU counters direct
> > > > access from userspace only when the system is homogeneous.
> > > > This feature checks the model of each CPU brought online and compares it
> > > > to the boot CPU. If it differs then it is heterogeneous.
> > > 
> > > It would be worth noting that this patch prevents heterogeneous CPUs
> > > being brought online late if the system was uniform at boot time.
> > 
> > Looking again, I think I'd misunderstood how
> > ARM64_CPUCAP_OPTIONAL_FOR_LATE_CPU was dealt with, but we do have a
> > problem in this area.
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > 
> > > > +		.capability = ARM64_HAS_HETEROGENEOUS_PMU,
> > > > +		.type = ARM64_CPUCAP_SCOPE_LOCAL_CPU | ARM64_CPUCAP_OPTIONAL_FOR_LATE_CPU,
> > > > +		.matches = has_heterogeneous_pmu,
> > > > +	},
> > 
> > I had a quick chat with Will, and we concluded that we must permit late
> > onlining of heterogeneous CPUs here as people are likely to rely on
> > late CPU onlining on some heterogeneous systems.
> > 
> > I think the above permits that, but that also means that we need some
> > support code to fail gracefully in that case (e.g. without sending
> > a SIGILL to unaware userspace code).
> 
> I understand, however, I understood that ARM64_CPUCAP_OPTIONAL_FOR_LATE_CPU
> did not allow later CPU to be heterogeneous if the capability wasn't already
> enabled.

Yes, I think that you're right. IIUC the absence of
ARM64_CPUCAP_PERMITTED_FOR_LATE_CPU is what prevents that from
happening.

> Thus if as you say we need to allow the system to switch from
> homogeneous to heterogeneous, then I should change the type of this
> capability.

I'm afraid so!

I believe we need both ARM64_CPUCAP_OPTIONAL_FOR_LATE_CPU and
ARM64_CPUCAP_PERMITTED_FOR_LATE_CPU, so I guess we should be using
ARM64_CPUCAP_WEAK_LOCAL_CPU_FEATURE.

Does that sound right to you? ... or have I confused myself again?

Thanks,
Mark.

> > That means that we'll need the counter emulation code that you had in
> > previous versions of this patch (e.g. to handle potential UNDEFs when a
> > new CPU has fewer counters than the previously online CPUs).
> > 
> > Further, I think the context switch (and event index) code needs to take
> > this cap into account, and disable direct access once the system becomes
> > heterogeneous.
> 
> That is a good point indeed.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -- 
> Raphael Gault

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-20 16:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-16 12:59 [PATCH v3 0/5] arm64: Enable access to pmu registers by user-space Raphael Gault
2019-08-16 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] perf: arm64: Add test to check userspace access to hardware counters Raphael Gault
2019-08-16 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] arm64: cpufeature: Add feature to detect heterogeneous systems Raphael Gault
2019-08-20 15:23   ` Mark Rutland
2019-08-20 15:49     ` Mark Rutland
2019-08-20 15:55       ` Raphael Gault
2019-08-20 16:03         ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2019-08-16 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] arm64: pmu: Add function implementation to update event index in userpage Raphael Gault
2019-08-20 15:34   ` Mark Rutland
2019-08-16 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] arm64: perf: Enable pmu counter direct access for perf event on armv8 Raphael Gault
2019-08-18 12:37   ` kbuild test robot
2019-08-19  7:59     ` Raphael Gault
2019-08-20  6:49       ` [kbuild-all] " Philip Li
2019-08-16 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] Documentation: arm64: Document PMU counters access from userspace Raphael Gault

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190820160357.GC43412@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=raph.gault+kdev@gmail.com \
    --cc=raphael.gault@arm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).