Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <5cf35f3742d1181421d955174b1aa9434d042c96.camel@kepstin.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tools/power turbostat: Fix RAPL summary collection
 on AMD processors
From:   Calvin Walton <calvin.walton@kepstin.ca>
To:     Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@amd.com>,
        lenb@kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wei.huang2@amd.com, aros@gmx.com,
        rui.zhang@intel.com
Date:   Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:42:09 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20210420143754.GA390118@chenyu-desktop>
References: <20210419195812.147710-1-terry.bowman@amd.com>
         <20210420020336.GA386151@chenyu-desktop> <20210420080701.GA2326@zn.tnic>
         <20210420131541.GA388877@chenyu-desktop>
         <4cbb1eff77de1e843912267ade4686cfa1acd610.camel@kepstin.ca>
         <20210420143754.GA390118@chenyu-desktop>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2021-04-20 at 22:37 +0800, Chen Yu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 09:28:06AM -0400, Calvin Walton wrote:
> > This patch has the same issue I noticed with the initial revision
> > of
> > Terry's patch - the idx_to_offset function returns type int (32-bit
> > signed), but MSR_PKG_ENERGY_STAT is greater than INT_MAX (or
> > rather,
> > would be interpreted as a negative number)
> > 
> > The end result is, as far as I can tell, that it hits the if
> > (offset <
> > 0) check in update_msr_sum() resulting in the timer callback for
> > updating the stat in the background when long durations are used to
> > not
> > happen.
> > 
> > For short durations it still works fine since the background update
> > isn't used.
> > 
> Ah, got it, nice catch. How about an incremental patch based on Bas'
> one
> to fix this 'overflow' issue? Would converting offset_to_idx(),
> idx_to_offset() and
> update_msr_sum() to use off_t instead of int be enough? Do you or
> Terry have interest
> to cook that patch? For Terry's version, I'm not sure if spliting
> the code into different CPU vendor would benefit in the future,
> except
> that we would have plenty of new MSRs to be introduced in the future.

Yes, I believe updating the offset_to_idx(), idx_to_offset(), and
update_msr_sum() functions is sufficient. I can do the incremental
patch for that this evening if nobody beats me to it :)

-- 
Calvin Walton <calvin.walton@kepstin.ca>