Re: [RESEND PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Fix unchecked MSR access error for Alder Lake N
From: Liang, Kan
Date: Mon Aug 22 2022 - 09:25:10 EST
On 2022-08-19 4:33 a.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 10:05:40AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 11:15:30AM -0700, kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>>> The Alder Lake N only has e-cores. The X86_FEATURE_HYBRID_CPU flag is
>>> not set. The perf cannot retrieve the correct CPU type via
>>> get_this_hybrid_cpu_type(). The model specific get_hybrid_cpu_type() is
>>> hardcode to p-core. The wrong CPU type is given to the PMU of the
>>> Alder Lake N.
>>
>> If ADL-N isn't in fact a hybrid CPU, then *WHY* are we running
>> init_hybrid_pmu() and setting up all that nonsense?
>>
>> That is, wouldn't the right thing be to remove ALDERLAKE_N from the rest
>> of {ALDER,RAPTOP}LAKE and create a non-hybrid PMU setup for it?
>
I think the only issue should be the PMU name. The non-hybrid PMU name
is "cpu". The hybrid PMU name is "cpu_$coretype". If we move the
ALDERLAKE_N to the non-hybrid PMU, the PMU name will be changed from
"cpu_atom" to "cpu". It will be different from the rest of
{ALDER,RAPTOP}LAKE.
Also, I think we have to update the perf tool for the events because of
the PMU name change.
But I guess it should be OK, since the ALDERLAKE_N was just added and we
know its an Atom-only system.
> Something like the *completely* untested below.. which adds it like a
> regular atom chip (which it is).
I will do more tests and send out a V2.
Thanks,
Kan
>
> (I basically did copy/paste of tremont and added bits from the cpu_atom
> thing from alderlake -- but might well have missed something)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> index 2db93498ff71..e509f1033a2d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> @@ -5974,6 +5974,38 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
> name = "Tremont";
> break;
>
> + case INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE_N:
> + x86_pmu.mid_ack = true;
> + memcpy(hw_cache_event_ids, glp_hw_cache_event_ids,
> + sizeof(hw_cache_event_ids));
> + memcpy(hw_cache_extra_regs, tnt_hw_cache_extra_regs,
> + sizeof(hw_cache_extra_regs));
> + hw_cache_event_ids[C(ITLB)][C(OP_READ)][C(RESULT_ACCESS)] = -1;
> +
> + intel_pmu_lbr_init_skl();
> +
> + x86_pmu.event_constraints = intel_slm_event_constraints;
> + x86_pmu.pebs_constraints = intel_grt_pebs_event_constraints;
> + x86_pmu.extra_regs = intel_grt_extra_regs;
> + /*
> + * It's recommended to use CPU_CLK_UNHALTED.CORE_P + NPEBS
> + * for precise cycles.
> + */
> + x86_pmu.pebs_aliases = NULL;
> + x86_pmu.pebs_prec_dist = true;
> + x86_pmu.lbr_pt_coexist = true;
> + x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_HAS_RSP_1;
> + x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_NO_HT_SHARING;
> + x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_PEBS_ALL;
> + x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_INSTR_LATENCY;
> + x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_MEM_LOADS_AUX;
> + x86_pmu.get_event_constraints = tnt_get_event_constraints;
> + td_attr = tnt_events_attrs;
> + extra_attr = slm_format_attr;
> + pr_cont("Gracemont events, ");
> + name = "Gracemont";
> + break;
> +
> case INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE:
> case INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE_EP:
> case INTEL_FAM6_WESTMERE_EX:
> @@ -6318,7 +6350,6 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
>
> case INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE:
> case INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE_L:
> - case INTEL_FAM6_ALDERLAKE_N:
> case INTEL_FAM6_RAPTORLAKE:
> case INTEL_FAM6_RAPTORLAKE_P:
> /*