[PATCH 2/2] perf: arm_pmuv3: Don't use PMCCNTR_EL0 on SMT cores

[Mark Rutland]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 04:08:30PM +0800, Yicong Yang wrote:
> From: Yicong Yang <yangyicong at hisilicon.com>
> 
> CPU_CYCLES is expected to count the logical CPU (PE) clock. Currently it's
> preferred to use PMCCNTR_EL0 for counting CPU_CYCLES, but it'll count
> processor clock rather than the PE clock (ARM DDI0487 L.b D13.1.3) if
> one of the SMT siblings is not idle on a multi-threaded implementation.
>
> So don't use it on SMT cores.

This is rather unfortunate.

When does this actually matter?

Per ARM DDI 0487 L.b, page D14-6918:

| If FEAT_PMUv3p9 is implemented, then CPU_CYCLES does not increment
| when the clocks are stopped by WFI and WFE instructions. Otherwise, it
| is CONSTRAINED UNPREDICTABLE whether or not CPU_CYCLES continues to
| increment when the clocks are stopped by WFI and WFE instructions.

... so prior to FEAT_PMUv3p9, no-one could rely on the difference
anyway.

> When counting cycles on SMT CPU 2-3 and CPU 3 is idle, without this
> patch we'll get:
> [root at client1 tmp]# perf stat -e cycles -A -C 2-3 -- stress-ng -c 1
> --taskset 2 --timeout 1
> [...]
>  Performance counter stats for 'CPU(s) 2-3':
> 
> CPU2           2880457316      cycles
> CPU3           2880459810      cycles
>        1.254688470 seconds time elapsed
> 
> With this patch the idle state of CPU3 is observed as expected:
> [root at client1 ~]#  perf stat -e cycles -A -C 2-3 -- stress-ng -c 1
> --taskset 2 --timeout 1
> [...]
>  Performance counter stats for 'CPU(s) 2-3':
> 
> CPU2           2558580492      cycles
> CPU3               305749      cycles
>        1.113626410 seconds time elapsed
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yicong Yang <yangyicong at hisilicon.com>
> ---
>  drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c
> index 95c899d07df5..ed3149632b71 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmuv3.c
> @@ -1002,6 +1002,15 @@ static bool armv8pmu_can_use_pmccntr(struct pmu_hw_events *cpuc,
>  	if (has_branch_stack(event))
>  		return false;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * The PMCCNTR_EL0 increments from the processor clock rather than
> +	 * the PE clock (ARM DDI0487 L.b D13.1.3) which means it'll continue
> +	 * counting on a WFI PE if one of its SMT silbing is not idle on a
> +	 * multi-threaded implementation. So don't use it on SMT cores.
> +	 */
> +	if (cpumask_weight(topology_sibling_cpumask(smp_processor_id())) > 1)
> +		return false;

This effectively forbids use of PMCCNTR_EL0 for any events.

Is there any existing event that it is useful for?

Mark.

> +
>  	return true;
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.24.0
>