Thread (40 messages) 40 messages, 5 authors, 2020-01-31

Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] Documentation: arm64: document support for the AMU extension

From: Valentin Schneider <hidden>
Date: 2020-01-27 16:47:35
Also in: linux-doc, lkml

On 18/12/2019 18:26, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
+Basic support
+-------------
+
+The kernel can safely run a mix of CPUs with and without support for the
+activity monitors extension. Therefore, when CONFIG_ARM64_AMU_EXTN is
+selected we unconditionally enable the capability to allow any late CPU
+(secondary or hotplugged) to detect and use the feature.
+
+When the feature is detected on a CPU, a per-CPU variable (amu_feat) is
+set, but this does not guarantee the correct functionality of the
+counters, only the presence of the extension.
+
+Firmware (code running at higher exception levels, e.g. arm-tf) support is
+needed to:
+ - Enable access for lower exception levels (EL2 and EL1) to the AMU
+   registers.
+ - Enable the counters. If not enabled these will read as 0.
Just to make sure I understand - if AMUs are physically present but not
enabled by FW, we'll still
- see them as implemented in ID_AA64PFR0_EL1.AMU
- see some counters as available with e.g. AMCGCR_ELO.CG0NC > 0

But reading some AMEVCNTR<g><n> will return 0?
+ - Save/restore the counters before/after the CPU is being put/brought up
+   from the 'off' power state.
+
+When using kernels that have this configuration enabled but boot with
+broken firmware the user may experience panics or lockups when accessing
+the counter registers.
Yikes
Even if these symptoms are not observed, the
+values returned by the register reads might not correctly reflect reality.
+Most commonly, the counters will read as 0, indicating that they are not
+enabled. If proper support is not provided in firmware it's best to disable
+CONFIG_ARM64_AMU_EXTN.
+
I haven't seen something that would try to catch this on the kernel side.
Can we try to detect that (e.g. at least one counter returns > 0) in
cpu_amu_enable() and thus not write to the CPU-local 'amu_feat'?

While we're on the topic of detecting broken stuff, what if some CPUs
implement some auxiliary counters that some others don't?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+The fixed counters of AMUv1 are accessible though the following system
+register definitions:
+ - SYS_AMEVCNTR0_CORE_EL0
+ - SYS_AMEVCNTR0_CONST_EL0
+ - SYS_AMEVCNTR0_INST_RET_EL0
+ - SYS_AMEVCNTR0_MEM_STALL_EL0
+
+Auxiliary platform specific counters can be accessed using
+SYS_AMEVCNTR1_EL0(n), where n is a value between 0 and 15.
+
+Details can be found in: arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h.
+
diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/booting.rst b/Documentation/arm64/booting.rst
index 5d78a6f5b0ae..a3f1a47b6f1c 100644
--- a/Documentation/arm64/booting.rst
+++ b/Documentation/arm64/booting.rst
@@ -248,6 +248,20 @@ Before jumping into the kernel, the following conditions must be met:
     - HCR_EL2.APK (bit 40) must be initialised to 0b1
     - HCR_EL2.API (bit 41) must be initialised to 0b1
 
+  For CPUs with Activity Monitors Unit v1 (AMUv1) extension present:
+  - If EL3 is present:
+    CPTR_EL3.TAM (bit 30) must be initialised to 0b0
+    CPTR_EL2.TAM (bit 30) must be initialised to 0b0
+    AMCNTENSET0_EL0 must be initialised to 0b1111
Nit: Or be a superset of the above, right? AIUI v1 only mandates the lower
4 bits to be set. Probably doesn't matter that much...


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help