On 2022-08-15 7:51 a.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 05:43:34PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
>>> index 2db93498ff71..b42c1beb9924 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
>>> @@ -5933,7 +5933,6 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_aliases = NULL;
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_prec_dist = true;
>>> x86_pmu.lbr_pt_coexist = true;
>>> - x86_pmu.pebs_capable = ~0ULL;
>>> x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_HAS_RSP_1;
>>> x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_PEBS_ALL;
>>> x86_pmu.get_event_constraints = glp_get_event_constraints;
>>> @@ -6291,7 +6290,6 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_aliases = NULL;
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_prec_dist = true;
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_block = true;
>>> - x86_pmu.pebs_capable = ~0ULL;
>>> x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_HAS_RSP_1;
>>> x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_NO_HT_SHARING;
>>> x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_PEBS_ALL;
>>> @@ -6337,7 +6335,6 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_aliases = NULL;
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_prec_dist = true;
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_block = true;
>>> - x86_pmu.pebs_capable = ~0ULL;
>>> x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_HAS_RSP_1;
>>> x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_NO_HT_SHARING;
>>> x86_pmu.flags |= PMU_FL_PEBS_ALL;
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>>> index ba60427caa6d..e2da643632b9 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>>> @@ -2258,6 +2258,7 @@ void __init intel_ds_init(void)
>>> x86_pmu.drain_pebs = intel_pmu_drain_pebs_icl;
>>> x86_pmu.pebs_record_size = sizeof(struct pebs_basic);
>>> if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.pebs_baseline) {
>>> + x86_pmu.pebs_capable = ~0ULL;
>>
>> The two features of "Extended PEBS (about pebs_capable)" and "Adaptive PEBS
>> (about pebs_baseline)"
>> are orthogonal, although the two are often supported together.
>
> The SDM explicitly states that PEBS Baseline implies Extended PEBS. See
> 3-19.8 (April 22 edition).
>
> The question is if there is hardware that has Extended PEBS but doesn't
> have Baseline; and I simply don't know and was hoping Kan could find
> out.
Goldmont Plus should be the only platform which supports extended PEBS
but doesn't have Baseline.
>
> That said; the above patch can be further improved by also removing the
> PMU_FL_PEBS_ALL lines, which is already set by intel_ds_init().
I think we have to keep PMU_FL_PEBS_ALL for the Goldmont Plus. But we
can remove it for SPR and ADL in intel_pmu_init(), since it's already
set in the intel_ds_init() for the Baseline.
Thanks,
Kan
>
> In general though; the point is, we shouldn't be doing the FMS table
> thing for discoverable features. Having pebs_capable = ~0 and
> PMU_FL_PEBS_ALL on something with BASELINE set is just wrong.
