[PATCH 5/9] x86, perf: Add support for LBRv5

From: Andi Kleen
Date: Thu May 07 2015 - 18:57:09 EST


From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Add support for the new LBRv5 format used on Skylake.

The flags for mispredict, abort, in_tx etc. moved to range of separate
LBR_INFO_* MSRs. Teach the LBR code to read those. The original
LBR registers stay the same, except they have full sign
extension now.

LBR_INFO also reports a cycle count to the last branch.
Report the cycle information using the new "cycles" branch_info
output field.

In addition we have to context switch and clear the new INFO
MSRs to avoid any information leaks.

Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h | 1 +
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++++-
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h
index c2031cb..6dabfdc 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h
@@ -595,6 +595,7 @@ struct x86_pmu {
struct x86_perf_task_context {
u64 lbr_from[MAX_LBR_ENTRIES];
u64 lbr_to[MAX_LBR_ENTRIES];
+ u64 lbr_info[MAX_LBR_ENTRIES];
int lbr_callstack_users;
int lbr_stack_state;
};
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c
index 94e5b50..d938cae 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c
@@ -13,7 +13,8 @@ enum {
LBR_FORMAT_EIP = 0x02,
LBR_FORMAT_EIP_FLAGS = 0x03,
LBR_FORMAT_EIP_FLAGS2 = 0x04,
- LBR_FORMAT_MAX_KNOWN = LBR_FORMAT_EIP_FLAGS2,
+ LBR_FORMAT_INFO = 0x05,
+ LBR_FORMAT_MAX_KNOWN = LBR_FORMAT_INFO,
};

static enum {
@@ -184,6 +185,8 @@ static void intel_pmu_lbr_reset_64(void)
for (i = 0; i < x86_pmu.lbr_nr; i++) {
wrmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_from + i, 0);
wrmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_to + i, 0);
+ if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.lbr_format == LBR_FORMAT_INFO)
+ wrmsrl(MSR_LBR_INFO_0 + i, 0);
}
}

@@ -232,6 +235,8 @@ static void __intel_pmu_lbr_restore(struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx)
lbr_idx = (tos - i) & mask;
wrmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_from + lbr_idx, task_ctx->lbr_from[i]);
wrmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_to + lbr_idx, task_ctx->lbr_to[i]);
+ if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.lbr_format == LBR_FORMAT_INFO)
+ wrmsrl(MSR_LBR_INFO_0 + i, task_ctx->lbr_info[i]);
}
task_ctx->lbr_stack_state = LBR_NONE;
}
@@ -253,6 +258,8 @@ static void __intel_pmu_lbr_save(struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx)
lbr_idx = (tos - i) & mask;
rdmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_from + lbr_idx, task_ctx->lbr_from[i]);
rdmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_to + lbr_idx, task_ctx->lbr_to[i]);
+ if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.lbr_format == LBR_FORMAT_INFO)
+ rdmsrl(MSR_LBR_INFO_0 + i, task_ctx->lbr_info[i]);
}
task_ctx->lbr_stack_state = LBR_VALID;
}
@@ -417,11 +424,22 @@ static void intel_pmu_lbr_read_64(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
unsigned long lbr_idx = (tos - i) & mask;
u64 from, to, mis = 0, pred = 0, in_tx = 0, abort = 0;
int skip = 0;
+ u16 cycles = 0;
int lbr_flags = lbr_desc[lbr_format];

rdmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_from + lbr_idx, from);
rdmsrl(x86_pmu.lbr_to + lbr_idx, to);

+ if (lbr_format == LBR_FORMAT_INFO) {
+ u64 info;
+
+ rdmsrl(MSR_LBR_INFO_0 + lbr_idx, info);
+ mis = !!(info & LBR_INFO_MISPRED);
+ pred = !mis;
+ in_tx = !!(info & LBR_INFO_IN_TX);
+ abort = !!(info & LBR_INFO_ABORT);
+ cycles = (info & LBR_INFO_CYCLES);
+ }
if (lbr_flags & LBR_EIP_FLAGS) {
mis = !!(from & LBR_FROM_FLAG_MISPRED);
pred = !mis;
@@ -451,6 +469,7 @@ static void intel_pmu_lbr_read_64(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
cpuc->lbr_entries[out].predicted = pred;
cpuc->lbr_entries[out].in_tx = in_tx;
cpuc->lbr_entries[out].abort = abort;
+ cpuc->lbr_entries[out].cycles = cycles;
cpuc->lbr_entries[out].reserved = 0;
out++;
}
--
1.9.3

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/