PMU event filter test fails on zen4 architecture because of unavailability of family and model check for zen4 in use_amd_pmu(). So, add family and model check for zen4 architecture in use_amd_pmu().
Signed-off-by: Manali Shukla manali.shukla@amd.com --- .../testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c index 3c85d1ae9893..c212ca4ffa72 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_event_filter_test.c @@ -374,6 +374,12 @@ static bool is_zen3(uint32_t family, uint32_t model) return family == 0x19 && model <= 0x0f; }
+static bool is_zen4(uint32_t family, uint32_t model) +{ + return family == 0x19 && ((model >= 0x10 && model <= 0x1f) || + (model >= 0xa0 && model <= 0xaf)); +} + /* * Determining AMD support for a PMU event requires consulting the AMD * PPR for the CPU or reference material derived therefrom. The AMD @@ -390,7 +396,8 @@ static bool use_amd_pmu(void) return host_cpu_is_amd && (is_zen1(family, model) || is_zen2(family, model) || - is_zen3(family, model)); + is_zen3(family, model) || + is_zen4(family, model)); }
/*
On Wed, May 01, 2024, Manali Shukla wrote:
PMU event filter test fails on zen4 architecture because of unavailability of family and model check for zen4 in use_amd_pmu(). So, add family and model check for zen4 architecture in use_amd_pmu().
Is there a less ugly way to detect that 0xc2,0 == "branch instructions retired"? E.g. can we instead check for v2 PMU support, or are there no guarantees going forward? Pivoting on FMS is so painful :-(
On 5/1/2024 9:02 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Wed, May 01, 2024, Manali Shukla wrote:
PMU event filter test fails on zen4 architecture because of unavailability of family and model check for zen4 in use_amd_pmu(). So, add family and model check for zen4 architecture in use_amd_pmu().
Is there a less ugly way to detect that 0xc2,0 == "branch instructions retired"? E.g. can we instead check for v2 PMU support, or are there no guarantees going forward? Pivoting on FMS is so painful :-(
We have confirmed with the hardware team that 0xc2,0 == "branch instructions retired" is always true going forward, we intend to maintain backward compatibility for branch instruction retired. Since event 0xc2 is supported on all currently released F17h+ processors as branch instructions retired, we can check for "family >= 0x17" for all Zen and its successors instead of checking them individually in pmu_event_filter_test.c.
- Manali
On Tue, May 28, 2024, Manali Shukla wrote:
On 5/1/2024 9:02 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Wed, May 01, 2024, Manali Shukla wrote:
PMU event filter test fails on zen4 architecture because of unavailability of family and model check for zen4 in use_amd_pmu(). So, add family and model check for zen4 architecture in use_amd_pmu().
Is there a less ugly way to detect that 0xc2,0 == "branch instructions retired"? E.g. can we instead check for v2 PMU support, or are there no guarantees going forward? Pivoting on FMS is so painful :-(
We have confirmed with the hardware team that 0xc2,0 == "branch instructions retired" is always true going forward, we intend to maintain backward compatibility for branch instruction retired. Since event 0xc2 is supported on all currently released F17h+ processors as branch instructions retired, we can check for "family >= 0x17" for all Zen and its successors instead of checking them individually in pmu_event_filter_test.c.
Can you send a patch for this? Please :-)
On 6/4/2024 3:47 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Tue, May 28, 2024, Manali Shukla wrote:
On 5/1/2024 9:02 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Wed, May 01, 2024, Manali Shukla wrote:
PMU event filter test fails on zen4 architecture because of unavailability of family and model check for zen4 in use_amd_pmu(). So, add family and model check for zen4 architecture in use_amd_pmu().
Is there a less ugly way to detect that 0xc2,0 == "branch instructions retired"? E.g. can we instead check for v2 PMU support, or are there no guarantees going forward? Pivoting on FMS is so painful :-(
We have confirmed with the hardware team that 0xc2,0 == "branch instructions retired" is always true going forward, we intend to maintain backward compatibility for branch instruction retired. Since event 0xc2 is supported on all currently released F17h+ processors as branch instructions retired, we can check for "family >= 0x17" for all Zen and its successors instead of checking them individually in pmu_event_filter_test.c.
Can you send a patch for this? Please :-)
Sent.
https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20240605050835.30491-1-manali.shukla@amd.com/T/#...
-Manali
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Manali Shukla -
Sean Christopherson