Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf/x86/amd/core: Add ref-cycles event for Zen 4 and later

[Ian Rogers]

On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 11:16 PM Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 3/25/2024 8:13 PM, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 12:48 AM Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@amdcom> wrote:
> >>
> >> Add the "ref-cycles" event for AMD processors based on Zen 4 and later
> >> microarchitectures. The backing event is based on PMCx120 which counts
> >> cycles not in halt state in P0 frequency (same as MPERF).
> >
> > This reminds me that we lack smi cost and an smi_cycles metric for
> > AMD, here is an Intel one:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/skylakex/skx-metrics.json?h=perf-tools-next#n274
> > The metric uses APERF but runs with freeze_on_smi set:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c?h=perf-tools-next#n2115
> > so the delta between cycles and aperf is the cycles in SMI. It would
> > be great if we could get something similar on AMD.
> >
>
> Thanks for the suggestion. I found PMCx02B ("ls_smi_rx" in perf JSONs) in
> the AMD PPRs which counts the number of SMIs received but there's no way
> to know how many cycles were spent in System Management Mode. I also could
> not find an equivalent for the Freeze on SMI feature.

Thanks Sandipan, I found similar. Fwiw on Intel I'd written this in
the new (out for review) python format stuff:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240314055919.1979781-4-irogers@xxxxxxxxxx/

Ian

> >> Signed-off-by: Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ian
> >
> >> ---
> >>  arch/x86/events/amd/core.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/amd/core.c b/arch/x86/events/amd/core.c
> >> index afe4a809f2ed..685bfa860d67 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/events/amd/core.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/events/amd/core.c
> >> @@ -273,8 +273,23 @@ static const u64 amd_zen2_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_MAX] =
> >>         [PERF_COUNT_HW_STALLED_CYCLES_FRONTEND] = 0x00a9,
> >>  };
> >>
> >> +static const u64 amd_zen4_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_MAX] =
> >> +{
> >> +       [PERF_COUNT_HW_CPU_CYCLES]              = 0x0076,
> >> +       [PERF_COUNT_HW_INSTRUCTIONS]            = 0x00c0,
> >> +       [PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_REFERENCES]        = 0xff60,
> >> +       [PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_MISSES]            = 0x0964,
> >> +       [PERF_COUNT_HW_BRANCH_INSTRUCTIONS]     = 0x00c2,
> >> +       [PERF_COUNT_HW_BRANCH_MISSES]           = 0x00c3,
> >> +       [PERF_COUNT_HW_STALLED_CYCLES_FRONTEND] = 0x00a9,
> >> +       [PERF_COUNT_HW_REF_CPU_CYCLES]          = 0x100000120,
> >> +};
> >> +
> >>  static u64 amd_pmu_event_map(int hw_event)
> >>  {
> >> +       if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_ZEN4) || boot_cpu_data.x86 >= 0x1a)
> >> +               return amd_zen4_perfmon_event_map[hw_event];
> >> +
> >>         if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_ZEN2) || boot_cpu_data.x86 >= 0x19)
> >>                 return amd_zen2_perfmon_event_map[hw_event];
> >>
> >> --
> >> 2.34.1
> >>
>