Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
IronPort-SDR: SWjTOvpMierBDBsS9i9rwSXmIZtL34Xor79oDA/eVVZDdRVnAtGbdQn30FCWJEj6mYXah/OS3D
 otGDcBF6C6Tw==
IronPort-SDR: OMKQRF7Fa+iUbgQ+e6v2U6cpSieyKSM7XzJhJm5+LAmhFnsLxwCxnMzjTRjWC4Fu+rYiAQvKiH
 /Xks5XdYTiTw==
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/resctrl: Support CPUID enumeration of MBM counter
 width
To:     Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc:     tglx@linutronix.de, bp@alien8.de, tony.luck@intel.com,
        kuo-lang.tseng@intel.com, mingo@redhat.com, babu.moger@amd.com,
        hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <cover.1585763047.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com>
 <76dc65631c373e0c1c9f3e8aaa768f022a2c989c.1585763047.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com>
 <20200403000527.GI188393@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
From:   Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Message-ID: <83423890-c3f5-3794-8e8b-4c0ac124cd42@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Apr 2020 08:31:12 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200403000527.GI188393@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Fenghua,

On 4/2/2020 5:05 PM, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 10:51:02AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> The original Memory Bandwidth Monitoring (MBM) architectural
>> definition defines counters of up to 62 bits in the
>> IA32_QM_CTR MSR while the first-generation MBM implementation
>> uses statically defined 24 bit counters.
>>
>> @@ -856,6 +856,8 @@ static void init_speculation_control(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>>  
>>  static void init_cqm(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>>  {
>> +	c->x86_cache_mbm_width_offset = -1;
>> +
>>  	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC)) {
>>  		c->x86_cache_max_rmid  = -1;
>>  		c->x86_cache_occ_scale = -1;
>> @@ -875,6 +877,9 @@ static void init_cqm(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>>  
>>  		c->x86_cache_max_rmid  = ecx;
>>  		c->x86_cache_occ_scale = ebx;
>> +		/* EAX contents is only defined for Intel CPUs */
>> +		if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL)
>> +			c->x86_cache_mbm_width_offset = eax & 0xff;
> 
> Is it reliable to read eax which is reserved on older platforms that
> don't support the feature?

The new ISE specification contains an architectural redefinition of EAX.

> 
> Seems the code assumes the reserved eax is 0 on those platforms. Is it
> reliable?

Testing on BDW, SKX, and CLX confirmed that EAX is 0. This addition thus
results in no functional change on these systems with them continuing to
use the original MBM width of 24.

Reinette