Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/fpu: Measure the Latency of XSAVE and XRSTOR

[Luck, Tony]

RDTSC has returned values invariant of current frequency since Nehalem (modulo a few hiccoughs). So any CPU with XSAVE/XRESTOR should be safe to measure using TSC.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 24, 2022, at 14:16, David Laight <David.Laight@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> From: Yi Sun
>> Sent: 23 July 2022 09:38
>> 
>> Calculate the latency of instructions xsave and xrstor with new trace
>> points x86_fpu_latency_xsave and x86_fpu_latency_xrstor.
>> 
>> The delta TSC can be calculated within a single trace event. Another
>> option considered was to have 2 separated trace events marking the
>> start and finish of the xsave/xrstor instructions. The delta TSC was
>> calculated from the 2 trace points in user space, but there was
>> significant overhead added by the trace function itself.
>> 
>> In internal testing, the single trace point option which is
>> implemented here proved to be more accurate.
> ...
> 
> I've done some experiments that measure short instruction latencies.
> Basically I found:
> 1) You need a suitable serialising instruction before and after
>   the code being tested - otherwise it can overlap whatever
>   you are using for timing.
> 2) The only reliable counter is the performance monitor clock
>   counter - everything else depends on the current cpu frequency.
>   On intel cpu the cpu frequency can change all the time.
> Allowing for that, and then ignoring complete outliers, I could
> get clock-count accurate values for iterations of the IP csum loop.
> 
>    David
> 
> -
> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
>