On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 21:17:59 +0800 Zhao Liu <zhao1....@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Jonathan, > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 04:35:27PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron via wrote: > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > ## New property: x-l2-cache-topo > > > > > > The property l2-cache-topo will be used to change the L2 cache topology > > > in CPUID.04H. > > > > > > Now it allows user to set the L2 cache is shared in core level or > > > cluster level. > > > > > > If user passes "-cpu x-l2-cache-topo=[core|cluster]" then older L2 cache > > > topology will be overrided by the new topology setting. > > > > > > Since CPUID.04H is used by intel cpus, this property is available on > > > intel cpus as for now. > > > > > > When necessary, it can be extended to CPUID[0x8000001D] for amd cpus. > > > > Hi Zhao Liu, > > > > As part of emulating arm's MPAM (cache partitioning controls) I needed > > to add the missing cache description in the ACPI PPTT table. As such I ran > > into a very similar problem to the one you are addressing. > > May I ask if the cache topology you need is symmetric or heterogeneous? > > I had the discussion with Yanan [5] about heterogeneous cache. If you > need a "symmetric" cache topology, maybe we could consider trying make > this x-l2-cache-topo more generic. For now, I'm interested in symmetric, but heterogeneous is certain to pop up at some point as people will build MPAM mobile systems. Right now there needs to be a lot of other work to emulate those well in QEMU given the cores are likely to be quite different. > > But if you need a heterogeneous cache topo, e.g., some cores have its > own l2 cache, and other cores share the same l2 cache, only this command > is not enough. > > Intel hybrid platforms have the above case I mentioned, we used "hybrid > CPU topology" [6] + "x-l2-cache-topo=cluster" to solve this: > > For example, AdlerLake has 2 types of core, one type is P-core with L2 per > P-core, and another type is E-core that 4 E-cores share a L2. > > So we set a CPU topology like this: > > Set 2 kinds of clusters: > * 1 P-core is in a cluster. > * 4 E-cores in a cluster. > > Then we use "x-l2-cache-topo" to make l2 is shared at cluster. In this > way, a P-core could own a L2 because its cluster only has 1 P-core, and > 4 E-cores could could share a L2. That can work if you aren't using clusters to describe other elements of the topology. We originally added PPTT based cluster support to Linux to enable sharing of l3 tags (but not l3 data) among a cluster of CPUs. So we'd need it for some of our platforms independent of this particular aspect. Sometimes the cluster will have associated caches sometimes it won't and they will be at a different level. PPTT represents that cache topology well but is complex. > > For more general way to set cache topology, Yanan and me discussed 2 > ways ([7] [8]). [8] depends on the QOM CPU topology mechanism that I'm > working on. > > [5]: https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-02/msg04795.html > [6]: https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-02/msg03205.html > [7]: https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-02/msg05139.html > [8]: https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-02/msg05167.html Great. I'll have a read! > > > > > I wonder if a more generic description is possible? We can rely on ordering > > of the cache levels, so what I was planning to propose was the rather > > lengthy > > but flexible (and with better names ;) > > > > -smp > > 16,sockets=1,clusters=4,threads=2,cache-cluster-start-level=2,cache-node-start-level=3 > > > > Could you explain more about this command? I'll cc you on the RFC patch set in a few mins. > I don't understand what > "cache-cluster-start-level=2,cache-node-start-level=3" mean. Assume hierarchical max Nth level cache. Cache levels 1 to (cache-cluster-start-level - 1) are private to a core (shared by threads). Cache levels cache-cluster-start-level to (cache-node-start-level - 1) are shared at cluster level. Cache levels cache cach-node-start-level to N are at the Numa node level which may or may not be the physical package. It very much assumes non heterogeneous though which I don't like about this scheme. > > > > > Perhaps we can come up with a common scheme that covers both usecases? > > It gets more fiddly to define if we have variable topology across different > > clusters > > - and that was going to be an open question in the RFC proposing this - our > > current > > definition of the more basic topology doesn't cover those cases anyway. > > > > What I want: > > > > 1) No restriction on maximum cache levels - ... > > Hmmm, if there's no cache name, it would be difficult to define in cli. Define by level number rather than name. > > > ... some systems have more than 3 > > What about L4? A name can simplify a lot of issues. True but if we can make it take a number as a parameter it extends to any level. > > > 2) Easy ability to express everything from all caches are private to all > > caches are shared. > > Is 3 levels enough? (private, shared at cluster level, shared at a level > > above that) I think > > so, but if not any scheme should be extensible to cover another level. > > It seems you may need the "heterogeneous" cache topology. So far, nope. I need to be able to define flexible. > > I think "private" and "shared" are not good definitions of cache, since > they are not technical terms? (Correct me if I'm wrong.) And i/d cache, > l1 cache, l2 cache are generic terms accepted by many architectures. Totally parallel concepts. L1, l2 etc are just distances from the core and even that gets fiddly if they aren't inclusive. Private just means the cache is not shared by multiple cores. The way you define it above is to put them in clusters, but the cluster concept means a bunch of other things that don't necessarily have anything to do with caches (many other resources may be shared). > > Though cache topology is different with CPU topology, it's true that the > cache topology is related to the CPU hierarchy, so I think using the CPU > topology hierarchy to define the heterogeneous topology looks like a more > appropriate way to do it. Agreed this needs to be built off the CPU topology (PPTT in ACPI is a good general way to describe things as I've not yet met a system it can't describe to some degree), but there can be levels of that topology there for different purposes than describing the sharing of cacehs. > > > > > Great if we can figure out a common scheme. > > Yeah, it's worth discussing. Let me catch up with the discussions you link above - perhaps the proposals are generic enough for my cases as well. The ARM world tends to have a lot more varied topology than x86 so we often see corner cases. Jonathan > > Thanks, > Zhao > > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > > > > # Patch description > > > > > > patch 1-2 Cleanups about coding style and test name. > > > > > > patch 3-4,15 Fixes about x86 topology, intel l1 cache topology and amd > > > cache topology encoding. > > > > > > patch 5-6 Cleanups about topology related CPUID encoding and QEMU > > > topology variables. > > > > > > patch 7-12 Add the module as the new CPU topology level in x86, and it > > > is corresponding to the cluster level in generic code. > > > > > > patch 13,14,16 Add cache topology infomation in cache models. > > > > > > patch 17 Introduce a new command to configure L2 cache topology. > > > > > > > > > [1]: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-05/msg07179.html > > > [2]: > > > https://patchew.org/QEMU/20211228092221.21068-1-wangyana...@huawei.com/ > > > [3]: > > > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/platforms/details/alder-lake-p.html > > > [4]: SDM, vol.3, ch.9, 9.9.1 Hierarchical Mapping of Shared Resources. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > Zhao > > > > > > --- > > > Changelog: > > > > > > Changes since v2: > > > * Add "Tested-by", "Reviewed-by" and "ACKed-by" tags. > > > * Use newly added wrapped helper to get cores per socket in > > > qemu_init_vcpu(). > > > > > > Changes since v1: > > > * Reordered patches. (Yanan) > > > * Deprecated the patch to fix comment of machine_parse_smp_config(). > > > (Yanan) > > > * Rename test-x86-cpuid.c to test-x86-topo.c. (Yanan) > > > * Split the intel's l1 cache topology fix into a new separate patch. > > > (Yanan) > > > * Combined module_id and APIC ID for module level support into one > > > patch. (Yanan) > > > * Make cache_into_passthrough case of cpuid 0x04 leaf in > > > * cpu_x86_cpuid() use max_processor_ids_for_cache() and > > > max_core_ids_in_package() to encode CPUID[4]. (Yanan) > > > * Add the prefix "CPU_TOPO_LEVEL_*" for CPU topology level names. > > > (Yanan) > > > * Rename the "INVALID" level to "CPU_TOPO_LEVEL_UNKNOW". (Yanan) > > > > > > --- > > > Zhao Liu (10): > > > i386: Fix comment style in topology.h > > > tests: Rename test-x86-cpuid.c to test-x86-topo.c > > > i386/cpu: Fix i/d-cache topology to core level for Intel CPU > > > i386/cpu: Use APIC ID offset to encode cache topo in CPUID[4] > > > i386/cpu: Consolidate the use of topo_info in cpu_x86_cpuid() > > > i386: Add cache topology info in CPUCacheInfo > > > i386: Use CPUCacheInfo.share_level to encode CPUID[4] > > > i386: Fix NumSharingCache for CPUID[0x8000001D].EAX[bits 25:14] > > > i386: Use CPUCacheInfo.share_level to encode > > > CPUID[0x8000001D].EAX[bits 25:14] > > > i386: Add new property to control L2 cache topo in CPUID.04H > > > > > > Zhuocheng Ding (7): > > > softmmu: Fix CPUSTATE.nr_cores' calculation > > > i386: Introduce module-level cpu topology to CPUX86State > > > i386: Support modules_per_die in X86CPUTopoInfo > > > i386: Support module_id in X86CPUTopoIDs > > > i386/cpu: Introduce cluster-id to X86CPU > > > tests: Add test case of APIC ID for module level parsing > > > hw/i386/pc: Support smp.clusters for x86 PC machine > > > > > > MAINTAINERS | 2 +- > > > hw/i386/pc.c | 1 + > > > hw/i386/x86.c | 49 +++++- > > > include/hw/core/cpu.h | 2 +- > > > include/hw/i386/topology.h | 68 +++++--- > > > qemu-options.hx | 10 +- > > > softmmu/cpus.c | 2 +- > > > target/i386/cpu.c | 158 ++++++++++++++---- > > > target/i386/cpu.h | 25 +++ > > > tests/unit/meson.build | 4 +- > > > .../{test-x86-cpuid.c => test-x86-topo.c} | 58 ++++--- > > > 11 files changed, 280 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-) > > > rename tests/unit/{test-x86-cpuid.c => test-x86-topo.c} (73%) > > > > > > > >
