RE: [PATCH v4 4/4] perf/smmuv3_pmu: Enable HiSilicon Erratum 162001800 quirk

[Shameerali Kolothum Thodi]

Hi Robin,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linuxarm [mailto:linuxarm-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
> Sent: 18 October 2018 16:27
> To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@xxxxxxx>; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx;
> jean-philippe.brucker@xxxxxxx
> Cc: mark.rutland@xxxxxxx; vkilari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> neil.m.leeder@xxxxxxxxx; pabba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; will.deacon@xxxxxxx;
> rruigrok@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Linuxarm <linuxarm@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-
> acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 4/4] perf/smmuv3_pmu: Enable HiSilicon Erratum
> 162001800 quirk
 
[...]

> 
> > > > +static const struct smmu_pmu_erratum_wa smmu_pmu_wa[] = {
> > > > +	{
> > > > +		.match_type = se_match_acpi_oem,
> > > > +		.id = hisi_162001800_oem_info,
> > > > +		.desc_str = "HiSilicon erratum 162001800",
> > > > +		.enable = hisi_erratum_evcntr_rdonly,
> > > > +	},
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > >
> > > There's an awful lot of raw ACPI internals splashed about here -
> > > couldn't at least some of it be abstracted behind the IORT code? In
> > > fact, can't IORT just set all this stuff up in advance like it does for
> > > SMMUs?
> >
> > Hmmm.. Sorry, not clear to me. You mean to say associate the IORT node
> > with platform device and retrieve it in driver just like smmu does for
> > "model" checks? Not sure that works here if thatâs what the above meant.
> >
> > > >   #define to_smmu_pmu(p) (container_of(p, struct smmu_pmu, pmu))
> > > >
> > > >   #define SMMU_PMU_EVENT_ATTR_EXTRACTOR(_name, _config, _start,
> > > _end)        \
> > > > @@ -224,15 +271,20 @@ static void smmu_pmu_set_period(struct
> > > smmu_pmu *smmu_pmu,
> > > >   	u32 idx = hwc->idx;
> > > >   	u64 new;
> > > >
> > > > -	/*
> > > > -	 * We limit the max period to half the max counter value of the
> > > counter
> > > > -	 * size, so that even in the case of extreme interrupt latency the
> > > > -	 * counter will (hopefully) not wrap past its initial value.
> > > > -	 */
> > > > -	new = smmu_pmu->counter_mask >> 1;
> > > > +	if (smmu_pmu->options & SMMU_PMU_OPT_EVCNTR_RDONLY) {
> > > > +		new = smmu_pmu_counter_get_value(smmu_pmu, idx);
> > >
> > > Something's clearly missing, because if this happens to start at 0, the
> > > current overflow handling code cannot possibly give the correct count.
> > > Much as I hate the reset-to-half-period idiom for being impossible to
> > > make sense of, it does make various aspects appear a lot simpler than
> > > they really are. Wait, maybe that's yet another reason to hate it...
> >
> > Yes,  if the counter starts at 0 and overflow happens, it won't possibly give
> > the correct count compared to the reset-to-half-period logic. Since this is a
> > 64 bit counter, just hope that, it won't necessarily happen that often.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > > +static void smmu_pmu_enable_errata(struct smmu_pmu *smmu_pmu,
> > > > +				enum smmu_pmu_erratum_match_type type,
> > > > +				se_match_fn_t match_fn,
> > > > +				void *arg)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	const struct smmu_pmu_erratum_wa *wa = smmu_pmu_wa;
> > > > +
> > > > +	for (; wa->desc_str; wa++) {
> > > > +		if (wa->match_type != type)
> > > > +			continue;
> > > > +
> > > > +		if (match_fn(wa, arg)) {
> > > > +			if (wa->enable) {
> > > > +				wa->enable(smmu_pmu);
> > > > +				dev_info(smmu_pmu->dev,
> > > > +					"Enabling workaround for %s\n",
> > > > +					 wa->desc_str);
> > > > +			}
> > >
> > > Just how many kinds of broken are we expecting here? Is this lifted from
> > > the arm64 cpufeature framework, because it seems like absolute overkill
> > > for a simple PMU driver which in all reality is only ever going to
> > > wiggle a few flags in some data structure.
> >
> > Yes, this erratum framework is based on the arm_arch_timer code. Agree
> that
> > this is an overkill if it is just to support this hardware. I am not sure this can
> be
> > extended to add the IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED events in future(I haven't
> > looked into that now). If this is not that useful in the near future, I will remove
> > the
> > framework part and use the OEM info directly to set the flag. Please let me
> > know
> > your thoughts..
> 
> Below is another take on this patch. Please let me know if this makes any
> sense..

Could you please let me know whether the below "simplified" version of
erratum looks any better or not?  And appreciate any other comments on
the rest of the series as well so that I can work on this and respin.

Thanks,
Shameer

> Thanks,
> Shameer
> 
> ----8----
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_smmuv3_pmu.c
> b/drivers/perf/arm_smmuv3_pmu.c
> index ef94b90..6f81b94 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_smmuv3_pmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_smmuv3_pmu.c
> @@ -96,6 +96,8 @@
> 
>  #define SMMU_PA_SHIFT                   12
> 
> +#define SMMU_PMU_OPT_EVCNTR_RDONLY	(1 << 0)
> +
>  static int cpuhp_state_num;
> 
>  struct smmu_pmu {
> @@ -111,10 +113,38 @@ struct smmu_pmu {
>  	struct device *dev;
>  	void __iomem *reg_base;
>  	void __iomem *reloc_base;
> +	u32 options;
>  	u64 counter_present_mask;
>  	u64 counter_mask;
>  };
> 
> +struct erratum_acpi_oem_info {
> +	char oem_id[ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE + 1];
> +	char oem_table_id[ACPI_OEM_TABLE_ID_SIZE + 1];
> +	u32 oem_revision;
> +	void (*enable)(struct smmu_pmu *smmu_pmu);
> +};
> +
> +void hisi_erratum_evcntr_rdonly(struct smmu_pmu *smmu_pmu)
> +{
> +	smmu_pmu->options |= SMMU_PMU_OPT_EVCNTR_RDONLY;
> +	dev_info(smmu_pmu->dev, "Enabling HiSilicon erratum
> 162001800\n");
> +}
> +
> +static struct erratum_acpi_oem_info acpi_oem_info[] = {
> +	/*
> +	 * Note that trailing spaces are required to properly match
> +	 * the OEM table information.
> +	 */
> +	{
> +		.oem_id         = "HISI  ",
> +		.oem_table_id   = "HIP08   ",
> +		.oem_revision   = 0,
> +		.enable = hisi_erratum_evcntr_rdonly,
> +	},
> +	{ /* Sentinel indicating the end of the OEM array */ },
> +};
> +
>  #define to_smmu_pmu(p) (container_of(p, struct smmu_pmu, pmu))
> 
>  #define SMMU_PMU_EVENT_ATTR_EXTRACTOR(_name, _config, _start, _end)
> \
> @@ -224,15 +254,20 @@ static void smmu_pmu_set_period(struct
> smmu_pmu *smmu_pmu,
>  	u32 idx = hwc->idx;
>  	u64 new;
> 
> -	/*
> -	 * We limit the max period to half the max counter value of the
> counter
> -	 * size, so that even in the case of extreme interrupt latency the
> -	 * counter will (hopefully) not wrap past its initial value.
> -	 */
> -	new = smmu_pmu->counter_mask >> 1;
> +	if (smmu_pmu->options & SMMU_PMU_OPT_EVCNTR_RDONLY) {
> +		new = smmu_pmu_counter_get_value(smmu_pmu, idx);
> +	} else {
> +		/*
> +		 * We limit the max period to half the max counter value
> +		 * of the counter size, so that even in the case of extreme
> +		 * interrupt latency the counter will (hopefully) not wrap
> +		 * past its initial value.
> +		 */
> +		new = smmu_pmu->counter_mask >> 1;
> +		smmu_pmu_counter_set_value(smmu_pmu, idx, new);
> +	}
> 
>  	local64_set(&hwc->prev_count, new);
> -	smmu_pmu_counter_set_value(smmu_pmu, idx, new);
>  }
> 
>  static void smmu_pmu_get_event_filter(struct perf_event *event, u32 *span,
> @@ -670,6 +705,28 @@ static void smmu_pmu_reset(struct smmu_pmu
> *smmu_pmu)
>  		       smmu_pmu->reloc_base + SMMU_PMCG_OVSCLR0);
>  }
> 
> +static void smmu_pmu_check_acpi_workarounds(struct smmu_pmu
> *smmu_pmu)
> +{
> +	static const struct erratum_acpi_oem_info empty_oem_info = {};
> +	const struct erratum_acpi_oem_info *info = acpi_oem_info;
> +	struct acpi_table_header *hdr;
> +
> +	if (ACPI_FAILURE(acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_IORT, 0, &hdr))) {
> +		dev_err(smmu_pmu->dev, "failed to get IORT\n");
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Iterate over the ACPI OEM info array, looking for a match */
> +	while (memcmp(info, &empty_oem_info, sizeof(*info))) {
> +		if (!memcmp(info->oem_id, hdr->oem_id, ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE)
> &&
> +		    !memcmp(info->oem_table_id, hdr->oem_table_id,
> ACPI_OEM_TABLE_ID_SIZE) &&
> +			info->oem_revision == hdr->oem_revision)
> +			info->enable(smmu_pmu);
> +
> +		info++;
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  static int smmu_pmu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>  	struct smmu_pmu *smmu_pmu;
> @@ -749,6 +806,8 @@ static int smmu_pmu_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
> 
> +	smmu_pmu_check_acpi_workarounds(smmu_pmu);
> +
>  	/* Pick one CPU to be the preferred one to use */
>  	smmu_pmu->on_cpu = get_cpu();
>  	WARN_ON(irq_set_affinity(smmu_pmu->irq, cpumask_of(smmu_pmu-
> >on_cpu)));
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxarm mailing list
> Linuxarm@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://hulk.huawei.com/mailman/listinfo/linuxarm