kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] KVM: arm64: Upgrade PMU support to ARMv8.4
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 17:29:36 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <606d0499-961d-53c5-e391-0f6f5fcd28cf@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20c1d805997523ae04f45be90fb4dd1a@kernel.org>

Hi Marc,

On 2/3/21 10:32 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2021-01-27 17:41, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> Had another look at the patch, comments below.
>>
>> On 1/25/21 12:26 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> Upgrading the PMU code from ARMv8.1 to ARMv8.4 turns out to be
>>> pretty easy. All that is required is support for PMMIR_EL1, which
>>> is read-only, and for which returning 0 is a valid option as long
>>> as we don't advertise STALL_SLOT as an implemented event.
>>>
>>> Let's just do that and adjust what we return to the guest.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h |  3 +++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c       |  6 ++++++
>>>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c       | 11 +++++++----
>>>  3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>>> index 8b5e7e5c3cc8..2fb3f386588c 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>>> @@ -846,7 +846,10 @@
>>>
>>>  #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_SHIFT        24
>>>
>>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_0        0x3
>>>  #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_1        0x4
>>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_4        0x5
>>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_5        0x6
>>>
>>>  #define ID_ISAR4_SWP_FRAC_SHIFT        28
>>>  #define ID_ISAR4_PSR_M_SHIFT        24
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>>> index 398f6df1bbe4..72cd704a8368 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>>> @@ -795,6 +795,12 @@ u64 kvm_pmu_get_pmceid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool pmceid1)
>>>          base = 0;
>>>      } else {
>>>          val = read_sysreg(pmceid1_el0);
>>> +        /*
>>> +         * Don't advertise STALL_SLOT, as PMMIR_EL0 is handled
>>> +         * as RAZ
>>> +         */
>>> +        if (vcpu->kvm->arch.pmuver >= ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_4)
>>> +            val &= ~BIT_ULL(ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_STALL_SLOT - 32);
>>
>> This is confusing the me. We have kvm->arch.pmuver set to the hardware
>> PMU version
>> (as set by __armv8pmu_probe_pmu()), but we ignore it when reporting the PMU
>> version to the guest. Why do we do that? We limit the event number in
>> kvm_pmu_event_mask() based on the hardware PMU version, so even if we advertise
>> Armv8.4 PMU, support for all those extra events added by Arm8.1 PMU is
>> missing (I hope I understood the code correctly).
>
> That's a bit of mess-up. We obtain ID_AA64DFR0_EL1 from the sanitised
> regs, but do most of our handling based on kvm->arch.pmuver. They really
> should be the same, because that's what the sanitised registers give
> you.
>
> As for the events themselves, I don't get your drift. We do support
> all the ARMv8.1 PMU events as long as the HW supports it, and we
> don't lie to the guest about it either (cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field
> does *cap* the field to some value, it doesn't allow it to increase
> past what the HW supports).
That's the piece that I was missing - I didn't realize that
cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field() makes sure that the final version doesn't exceed
what the hardware supports. Thanks for clearing it up!
>
>> I looked at commit c854188ea010 ("KVM: arm64: limit PMU version to PMUv3 for
>> ARMv8.1") which changed read_id_reg() to report PMUv3 for Armv8.1
>> unconditionally,
>> and there's no explanation why PMUv3 for Armv8.1 was chosen instead of
>> plain PMUv3 (PMUVer = 0b0100).
>
> We picked ARMv8.1 because this is the first PMU revision that gives
> you events in the 0x4000 range, all of which are available on
> common ARMv8.2 HW.

Yes, makes sense in the context of cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field() capping
PMUVer based on the hardware supported version.

Thanks,
Alex

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-03 17:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-25 12:26 [PATCH v2 0/7] KVM: arm64: More PMU/debug ID register fixes Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] KVM: arm64: Fix missing RES1 in emulation of DBGBIDR Marc Zyngier
2021-01-26 17:32   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] KVM: arm64: Fix AArch32 PMUv3 capping Marc Zyngier
2021-01-26 17:35   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] KVM: arm64: Add handling of AArch32 PCMEID{2,3} PMUv3 registers Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] KVM: arm64: Refactor filtering of ID registers Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 12:12   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] KVM: arm64: Limit the debug architecture to ARMv8.0 Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 12:18   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] KVM: arm64: Upgrade PMU support to ARMv8.4 Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 14:09   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 14:35     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 17:00       ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:23         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 17:41   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-02-03 10:32     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 17:29       ` Alexandru Elisei [this message]
2021-01-27 17:53   ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 10:36     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 11:07       ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 11:20         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 12:39           ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 13:28             ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 12:32               ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-02-04 14:21                 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] KVM: arm64: Use symbolic names for the PMU versions Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 14:28   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:56   ` Auger Eric

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=606d0499-961d-53c5-e391-0f6f5fcd28cf@arm.com \
    --to=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
    --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@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).