Message ID | cover.1729804024.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | selftests/resctrl: Support diverse platforms with MBM and MBA tests | expand |
On 10/24/24 15:18, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Changes since V3: > - V3: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1729218182.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com/ > - Rebased on HEAD 2a027d6bb660 of kselftest/next. > - Fix empty string parsing issues pointed out by Ilpo. > - Add Reviewed-by tags. > - Please see individual patches for detailed changes. > > Changes since V2: > - V2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1726164080.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com/ > - Add fix to protect against buffer overflow when parsing text from sysfs files. > - Add cleanup patch to address use of magic constants as pointed out by > Ilpo. > - Add Reviewed-by tags where received, except for "selftests/resctrl: Use cache > size to determine "fill_buf" buffer size" that changed too much since > receiving the Reviewed-by tag. > - Please see individual patches for detailed changes. > > Changes since V1: > - V1: https://lore.kernel.org/cover.1724970211.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com/ > - V2 contains the same general solutions to stated problem as V1 but these > are now preceded by more fixes (patches 1 to 5) and improved robustness > (patches 6 to 9) to existing tests before the series gets back > to solving the original problem with more confidence in patches 10 to 13. > - The posibility of making "memflush = false" for CMT test was discussed > during V1. Modifying this setting does not have a significant impact on the > observed results that are already well within acceptable range and this > version thus keeps original default. If performance was a goal it may > be possible to do further experimentation where "memflush = false" could > eliminate the need for the sleep(1) within the test wrapper, but > improving the performance is not a goal of this work. > - (New) Support what seems to be unintended ability for user space to provide > parameters to "fill_buf" by making the parsing robust and only support > changing parameters that are supported to be changed. Drop support for > "write" operation since it has never been measured. > - (New) Improve wraparound handling. (Ilpo) > - (New) A couple of new fixes addressing issues discovered during development. > - (Change from V1) To support fill_buf parameters provided by user space as > well as test specific fill_buf parameters struct fill_buf_param is no longer > just a member of struct resctrl_val_param, instead there could be at most > two instances of struct fill_buf_param, the immutable parameters provided > by user space and the parameters used by individual tests. (Ilpo) > - Please see individual patches for detailed changes. > > V1 cover: > > The resctrl selftests for Memory Bandwidth Allocation (MBA) and Memory > Bandwidth Monitoring (MBM) are failing on some (for example [1]) Emerald > Rapids systems. The test failures result from the following two > properties of these systems: > 1) Emerald Rapids systems can have up to 320MB L3 cache. The resctrl > MBA and MBM selftests measure memory traffic for which a hardcoded > 250MB buffer has been sufficient so far. On platforms with L3 cache > larger than the buffer, the buffer fits in the L3 cache and thus > no/very little memory traffic is generated during the "memory > bandwidth" tests. > 2) Some platform features, for example RAS features or memory > performance features that generate memory traffic may drive accesses > that are counted differently by performance counters and MBM > respectively, for instance generating "overhead" traffic which is not > counted against any specific RMID. Until now these counting > differences have always been "in the noise". On Emerald Rapids > systems the maximum MBA throttling (10% memory bandwidth) > throttles memory bandwidth to where memory accesses by these other > platform features push the memory bandwidth difference between > memory controller performance counters and resctrl (MBM) beyond the > tests' hardcoded tolerance. > > Make the tests more robust against platform variations: > 1) Let the buffer used by memory bandwidth tests be guided by the size > of the L3 cache. > 2) Larger buffers require longer initialization time before the buffer can > be used to measurement. Rework the tests to ensure that buffer > initialization is complete before measurements start. > 3) Do not compare performance counters and MBM measurements at low > bandwidth. The value of "low" is hardcoded to 750MiB based on > measurements on Emerald Rapids, Sapphire Rapids, and Ice Lake > systems. This limit is not applicable to AMD systems since it > only applies to the MBA and MBM tests that are isolated to Intel. > > [1] > https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/237261/intel-xeon-platinum-8592-processor-320m-cache-1-9-ghz.html > > Reinette Chatre (15): > selftests/resctrl: Make functions only used in same file static > selftests/resctrl: Print accurate buffer size as part of MBM results > selftests/resctrl: Fix memory overflow due to unhandled wraparound > selftests/resctrl: Protect against array overrun during iMC config > parsing > selftests/resctrl: Protect against array overflow when reading strings > selftests/resctrl: Make wraparound handling obvious > selftests/resctrl: Remove "once" parameter required to be false > selftests/resctrl: Only support measured read operation > selftests/resctrl: Remove unused measurement code > selftests/resctrl: Make benchmark parameter passing robust > selftests/resctrl: Ensure measurements skip initialization of default > benchmark > selftests/resctrl: Use cache size to determine "fill_buf" buffer size > selftests/resctrl: Do not compare performance counters and resctrl at > low bandwidth > selftests/resctrl: Keep results from first test run > selftests/resctrl: Replace magic constants used as array size > > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/cmt_test.c | 37 +- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/fill_buf.c | 45 +- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mba_test.c | 54 ++- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c | 37 +- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h | 79 +++- > .../testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c | 95 +++- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_val.c | 447 +++++------------- > tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrlfs.c | 19 +- > 8 files changed, 354 insertions(+), 459 deletions(-) > > > base-commit: 2a027d6bb66002c8e50e974676f932b33c5fce10 Is this patch series ready to be applied? thanks, -- Shuah
Hi Shuah, On 10/24/24 3:36 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > > Is this patch series ready to be applied? > I believe it is close ... I would like to give Ilpo some time to peek at patches 2 and 10 to confirm if I got their fixes right this time. The rest of the series is ready. Thank you Reinette
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Shuah, > > On 10/24/24 3:36 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > > > > Is this patch series ready to be applied? > > > > I believe it is close ... I would like to give Ilpo some time to peek > at patches 2 and 10 to confirm if I got their fixes right this time. The > rest of the series is ready. Hi, I took a look at those two patches now and they seemed fine to me so this series should be ready to go now.
On 10/25/24 6:54 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > On Thu, 24 Oct 2024, Reinette Chatre wrote: > >> Hi Shuah, >> >> On 10/24/24 3:36 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> >>> Is this patch series ready to be applied? >>> >> >> I believe it is close ... I would like to give Ilpo some time to peek >> at patches 2 and 10 to confirm if I got their fixes right this time. The >> rest of the series is ready. > > Hi, > > I took a look at those two patches now and they seemed fine to me so this > series should be ready to go now. > Thank you very much Ilpo. Reinette