RE: [PATCH v8 03/13] x86/cpufeatures: Add Bandwidth Monitoring Event Configuration feature flag

From: Moger, Babu
Date: Wed Nov 23 2022 - 18:06:18 EST

Next message: Paul E. McKenney: "Re: objtool warning for next-20221118"
Previous message: Jarkko Sakkinen: "Re: [PATCH v4 03/11] tpm: Allow PCR 23 to be restricted to kernel-only use"
In reply to: Yu, Fenghua: "RE: [PATCH v8 03/13] x86/cpufeatures: Add Bandwidth Monitoring Event Configuration feature flag"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[AMD Official Use Only - General]

Hi Fenghua,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yu, Fenghua <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2022 12:17 PM
> To: Moger, Babu <Babu.Moger@xxxxxxx>; corbet@xxxxxxx; Chatre, Reinette
> <reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx>; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx;
> bp@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; hpa@xxxxxxxxx;
> paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; quic_neeraju@xxxxxxxxxxx;
> rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; damien.lemoal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx;
> pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx; Bae, Chang Seok <chang.seok.bae@xxxxxxxxx>;
> pawan.kumar.gupta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jmattson@xxxxxxxxxx;
> daniel.sneddon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Das1, Sandipan <Sandipan.Das@xxxxxxx>;
> Luck, Tony <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>; james.morse@xxxxxxx; linux-
> doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx;
> Eranian, Stephane <eranian@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v8 03/13] x86/cpufeatures: Add Bandwidth Monitoring
> Event Configuration feature flag
>
> Hi, Babu,
>
> > Newer AMD processors support the new feature Bandwidth Monitoring
> > Event Configuration (BMEC).
> >
> > The feature support is identified via CPUID Fn8000_0020_EBX_x0 (ECX=0).
> > Bits Field Name Description
> > 3 EVT_CFG Bandwidth Monitoring Event Configuration (BMEC)
> >
> > Currently, the bandwidth monitoring events mbm_total_bytes and
> > mbm_local_bytes are set to count all the total and local reads/writes
> > respectively. With the introduction of slow memory, the two counters
> > are not enough to count all the different types of memory events. With
> > the feature BMEC, the users have the option to configure
> > mbm_total_bytes and mbm_local_bytes to count the specific type of events.
> >
> > Each BMEC event has a configuration MSR, QOS_EVT_CFG (0xc000_0400h +
> > EventID) which contains one field for each bandwidth type that can be
> > used to configure the bandwidth event to track any combination of
> > supported bandwidth types. The event will count requests from every
> > bandwidth type bit that is set in the corresponding configuration register.
> >
> > Following are the types of events supported:
> >
> > ==== ========================================================
> > Bits Description
> > ==== ========================================================
> > 6 Dirty Victims from the QOS domain to all types of memory
> > 5 Reads to slow memory in the non-local NUMA domain
> > 4 Reads to slow memory in the local NUMA domain
> > 3 Non-temporal writes to non-local NUMA domain
> > 2 Non-temporal writes to local NUMA domain
> > 1 Reads to memory in the non-local NUMA domain
> > 0 Reads to memory in the local NUMA domain
> > ==== ========================================================
> >
> > By default, the mbm_total_bytes configuration is set to 0x7F to count
> > all the event types and the mbm_local_bytes configuration is set to
> > 0x15 to count all the local memory events.
> >
> > Feature description is available in the specification, "AMD64
> > Technology Platform Quality of Service Extensions, Revision: 1.03
> > Publication
> >
> > Link:
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.
> > amd.com%2Fen%2Fsupport%2Ftech-docs%2Famd64-technology-
> &data=05%7C0
> >
> 1%7Cbabu.moger%40amd.com%7C50e1807651fd4513648908dacd7efac0%7C3
> dd8961f
> >
> e4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C638048242504277761%7CUnknow
> n%7CTWFp
> >
> bGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6
> Mn
> >
> 0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5lpXbZkZ78mJ1d9PnLf7WmRT5vPogfs
> 5HaZLz76
> > x04I%3D&reserved=0
> > platform-quality-service-extensions
> > Link:
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugz
> >
> illa.kernel.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D206537&data=05%7C01%7Cbab
> u.m
> >
> oger%40amd.com%7C50e1807651fd4513648908dacd7efac0%7C3dd8961fe488
> 4e608e
> >
> 11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C638048242504277761%7CUnknown%7CTWFpb
> GZsb3d8ey
> >
> JWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7
> C300
> >
> 0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2CjPpzCT4JeA9VPNZIW7zxyL22xpEm2FoXQlhAz5OK
> o%3D&am
> > p;reserved=0
> > Signed-off-by: Babu Moger <babu.moger@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 +
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpuid-deps.c | 1 +
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > index d68b4c9c181d..6732ca0117be 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > @@ -306,6 +306,7 @@
> > #define X86_FEATURE_RSB_VMEXIT_LITE (11*32+17) /* "" Fill RSB on
> VM
> > exit when EIBRS is enabled */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_CALL_DEPTH (11*32+18) /* "" Call depth
> > tracking for RSB stuffing */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_SMBA (11*32+19) /* Slow Memory
> > Bandwidth Allocation */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_BMEC (11*32+20) /* AMD
> Bandwidth
> > Monitoring Event Configuration (BMEC) */
> >
> > /* Intel-defined CPU features, CPUID level 0x00000007:1 (EAX), word 12 */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_AVX_VNNI (12*32+ 4) /* AVX VNNI
> > instructions */
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpuid-deps.c
> > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpuid- deps.c index c881bcafba7d..4555f9596ccf
> > 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpuid-deps.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpuid-deps.c
> > @@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ static const struct cpuid_dep cpuid_deps[] = {
> > { X86_FEATURE_CQM_OCCUP_LLC,
> > X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC },
> > { X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL,
> > X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC },
> > { X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL,
> > X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC },
> > + { X86_FEATURE_BMEC, X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC },
>
> Shouldn't X86_FEATURE_BMEC really depend on
> X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL and _TOTAL?
>
> CQM_MBM_LOCAL and/or _TOTAL can be disabled but CQM_LLC can still be
> enabled. In this case, BMEC shouldn't be enabled, right? But with this patch,
> BMEC will be enabled but it won't work well as CQM_MBM_TOTAL/_LOCAL
> are not enabled.

Yes. You are right.
>
> You may remove the above line and add these two lines:
>
> + { X86_FEATURE_BMEC,
> X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL },
> + { X86_FEATURE_BMEC,
> X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL },
>

Sure. Will add these lines.
Thanks
Babu

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Next message: Paul E. McKenney: "Re: objtool warning for next-20221118"
Previous message: Jarkko Sakkinen: "Re: [PATCH v4 03/11] tpm: Allow PCR 23 to be restricted to kernel-only use"
In reply to: Yu, Fenghua: "RE: [PATCH v8 03/13] x86/cpufeatures: Add Bandwidth Monitoring Event Configuration feature flag"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]