[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] perf: Check all MSRs before passing hw check

* George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 18/03/13 08:42, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >* George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >>check_hw_exists has a number of checks which go to two exit paths:
> >>msr_fail and bios_fail.  Checks classified as msr_fail will cause
> >>check_hw_exists() to return false, causing the PMU not to be used;
> >>bios_fail checks will only cause a warning to be printed, but will
> >>return true.
> >>
> >>The problem is that if there are both msr failures and bios failures,
> >>and the routine hits a bios_fail check first, it will exit early and
> >>return true, not finishing the rest of the msr checks.  If those msrs
> >>are in fact broken, it will cause them to be used erroneously.
> >>
> >>This changset causes check_hw_exists() to go through all of the msr
> >>checks, failing and returning false if any of them fail.
> >>
> >>This problem affects kernels as far back as 3.2, and should thus be
> >>considered for backport.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>CC: Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>CC: x86@xxxxxxxxxx
> >>---
> >>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c |   20 ++++++++++----------
> >>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >What is missing is a description of what specific platform this gets
> >triggered on and exactly why. Is some hw feature emulation missing that
> >causes the check to fail?
> Remember, there are two checks failing: the second one is supposed
> to fail and disable the PMU entirely, but it's not getting there
> because when the first one fails, it skips the rest but returns
> "success" anyway.
> The warning on the first check is as follows:
> [    8.131985] Performance Events: Broken BIOS detected, complain to
> your hardware vendor.^M
> [    8.139997] [Firmware Bug]: the BIOS has corrupted hw-PMU
> resources (MSR c0010000 is 530076)^M
> c0010000 is the AMD  MSR_K7_EVNTSEL0; the check it's failing is:
> So it discovers that one of the performance counters is already
> enabled -- worth a warning, but by itself not worth disabling the
> PMU.  This is most likely to be exactly what the warning message
> says: a buggy BIOS that enables perfcounters enabled for some
> reason.
> The second check is supposed to detect that the PMU is actually not
> usable -- in my case because it's running virtualized (under Xen).

I got the logic from your original description - what I wanted was for the 
specific messages to be included in the patch changelog, plus a 
description of what misbehaved before the patch and what behaves better 
after the patch - on your specific system.

In other words, please use the customary changelog style we use in the 

  " Current code does (A), this has a problem when (B).
    We can improve this doing (C), because (D)."



Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.