linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
	robin.murphy@arm.com, julien.thierry@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] arm64: perf: Disable PMU while processing counter overflows
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 11:43:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180619104323.huwx5n2z53lmtnux@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1529403342-17899-7-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:15:41AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> The arm64 PMU updates the event counters and reprograms the
> counters in the overflow IRQ handler without disabling the
> PMU. This could potentially cause skews in for group counters,
> where the overflowed counters may potentially loose some event
> counts, while they are reprogrammed. To prevent this, disable
> the PMU while we process the counter overflows and enable it
> right back when we are done.
> 
> This patch also moves the PMU stop/start routines to avoid a
> forward declaration.
> 
> Suggested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>

Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>

This makes me realise that we could remove the pmu_lock, but that's not
a new problem, and we can address that separately.

Thanks,
Mark.

> ---
>  arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> index 9ce3729..eebc635 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c
> @@ -678,6 +678,28 @@ static void armv8pmu_disable_event(struct perf_event *event)
>  	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
>  }
>  
> +static void armv8pmu_start(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
> +{
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	struct pmu_hw_events *events = this_cpu_ptr(cpu_pmu->hw_events);
> +
> +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
> +	/* Enable all counters */
> +	armv8pmu_pmcr_write(armv8pmu_pmcr_read() | ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_E);
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
> +}
> +
> +static void armv8pmu_stop(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
> +{
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	struct pmu_hw_events *events = this_cpu_ptr(cpu_pmu->hw_events);
> +
> +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
> +	/* Disable all counters */
> +	armv8pmu_pmcr_write(armv8pmu_pmcr_read() & ~ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_E);
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
> +}
> +
>  static irqreturn_t armv8pmu_handle_irq(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
>  {
>  	u32 pmovsr;
> @@ -702,6 +724,11 @@ static irqreturn_t armv8pmu_handle_irq(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
>  	 */
>  	regs = get_irq_regs();
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Stop the PMU while processing the counter overflows
> +	 * to prevent skews in group events.
> +	 */
> +	armv8pmu_stop(cpu_pmu);
>  	for (idx = 0; idx < cpu_pmu->num_events; ++idx) {
>  		struct perf_event *event = cpuc->events[idx];
>  		struct hw_perf_event *hwc;
> @@ -726,6 +753,7 @@ static irqreturn_t armv8pmu_handle_irq(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
>  		if (perf_event_overflow(event, &data, regs))
>  			cpu_pmu->disable(event);
>  	}
> +	armv8pmu_start(cpu_pmu);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Handle the pending perf events.
> @@ -739,28 +767,6 @@ static irqreturn_t armv8pmu_handle_irq(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
>  	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>  }
>  
> -static void armv8pmu_start(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
> -{
> -	unsigned long flags;
> -	struct pmu_hw_events *events = this_cpu_ptr(cpu_pmu->hw_events);
> -
> -	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
> -	/* Enable all counters */
> -	armv8pmu_pmcr_write(armv8pmu_pmcr_read() | ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_E);
> -	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
> -}
> -
> -static void armv8pmu_stop(struct arm_pmu *cpu_pmu)
> -{
> -	unsigned long flags;
> -	struct pmu_hw_events *events = this_cpu_ptr(cpu_pmu->hw_events);
> -
> -	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
> -	/* Disable all counters */
> -	armv8pmu_pmcr_write(armv8pmu_pmcr_read() & ~ARMV8_PMU_PMCR_E);
> -	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&events->pmu_lock, flags);
> -}
> -
>  static int armv8pmu_get_event_idx(struct pmu_hw_events *cpuc,
>  				  struct perf_event *event)
>  {
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2018-06-19 10:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-19 10:15 [PATCH v3 0/7] arm64: perf: Support for chained counters Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-19 10:15 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] arm_pmu: Clean up maximum period handling Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-19 10:45   ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-19 10:15 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] arm_pmu: Change API to support 64bit counter values Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-19 10:52   ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-19 10:15 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] arm_pmu: Add support for 64bit event counters Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-19 10:57   ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-19 10:15 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] arm_pmu: Tidy up clear_event_idx call backs Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-29 13:27   ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-29 13:40   ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-29 14:18     ` Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-29 14:29       ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-19 10:15 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] arm64: perf: Clean up armv8pmu_select_counter Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-29 13:29   ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-19 10:15 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] arm64: perf: Disable PMU while processing counter overflows Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-19 10:43   ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2018-06-19 10:15 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] arm64: perf: Add support for chaining event counters Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-29 14:01   ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-29 14:29     ` Suzuki K Poulose
2018-06-29 14:39       ` Mark Rutland

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=20180619104323.huwx5n2z53lmtnux@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=julien.thierry@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@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).