From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@kdab.com>
Cc: "Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@redhat.com>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, "Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@kernel.org>,
"Namhyung Kim" <namhyung@kernel.org>,
"Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf report: Support caller callchain order when using DWARF unwinder.
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:19:44 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151102211944.GR2923@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2192570.dg0L2eaEiH@agathebauer>
Em Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 07:29:34PM +0200, Milian Wolff escreveu:
> On Montag, 5. Oktober 2015 13:08:36 CEST Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 05:38:17PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Em Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 05:16:37PM +0200, Milian Wolff escreveu:
> > > > We cannot reverse the order of the libunwind stepper. To workaround
> > > > this, we store the IPs in a temporary stack buffer and then walk
> > > > this buffer in reverse order when callchain_param.order is set to
> > > > ORDER_CALLER.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@kdab.com>
> > >
> > > Jiri,
> > >
> > > Can you please take a look at this?
> > >
> > > - Arnaldo
> > >
> > > > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > tools/perf/util/unwind-libunwind.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++----
> > > > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/unwind-libunwind.c
> > > > b/tools/perf/util/unwind-libunwind.c index 4c00507..bf631f1 100644
> > > > --- a/tools/perf/util/unwind-libunwind.c
> > > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/unwind-libunwind.c
> > > > @@ -621,11 +621,24 @@ static int get_entries(struct unwind_info *ui,
> > > > unwind_entry_cb_t cb,> >
> > > > if (ret)
> > > >
> > > > display_error(ret);
> > > >
> > > > - while (!ret && (unw_step(&c) > 0) && max_stack--) {
> > > > - unw_word_t ip;
> > > > + if (callchain_param.order == ORDER_CALLEE) {
> > > > + while (!ret && (unw_step(&c) > 0) && max_stack--) {
> > > > + unw_word_t ip;
> > > >
> > > > - unw_get_reg(&c, UNW_REG_IP, &ip);
> > > > - ret = ip ? entry(ip, ui->thread, cb, arg) : 0;
> > > > + unw_get_reg(&c, UNW_REG_IP, &ip);
> > > > + ret = ip ? entry(ip, ui->thread, cb, arg) : 0;
> > > > + }
> > > > + } else {
> > > > + unw_word_t ips[max_stack];
> > > > + int i = 0;
> > > > +
> > > > + while ((unw_step(&c) > 0) && i < max_stack) {
> > > > + unw_get_reg(&c, UNW_REG_IP, &ips[i]);
> > > > + ++i;
> > > > + }
> > > > + max_stack = i;
> > > > + for (i = max_stack - 1; i >= 0; --i)
> > > > + entry(ips[i], ui->thread, cb, arg);
> >
> > there's no check for return value of entry callback
> >
> > also I wonder would it be better to store into ips[] within
> > the single loop all the time, and iterate throught it after
> > forward/backward based on the callchain_param.order
> >
> > please check attached patch, totaly untested, probably leaking some index
> > ;-)
> >
> > any chance this could be done also for util/unwind-libdw.c ?
>
> That patch looks much better than mine. I'll try it out later next week and
> will also have a look at util/unwind-libdw.c. Question: How can I test the
So, you tried this patch, right? Jiri, have you submitted this in some
other message I missed?
- Arnaldo
> behavior of the latter? Do I need to uninstall libunwind, or can I change the
> unwinder at runtime somehow (env var?).
>
> Also, are there unit tests for this behavior somewhere?
> --
> Milian Wolff | milian.wolff@kdab.com | Software Engineer
> KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company
> Tel: +49-30-521325470
> KDAB - The Qt Experts
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-02 21:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-04 15:16 [PATCH] perf report: Support caller callchain order when using DWARF unwinder Milian Wolff
2015-10-04 20:38 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2015-10-05 11:08 ` Jiri Olsa
2015-10-09 17:29 ` Milian Wolff
2015-11-02 21:19 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
2015-11-03 7:33 ` Jiri Olsa
2015-11-03 12:06 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2015-11-03 12:54 ` Milian Wolff
2015-11-03 14:28 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2015-11-03 14:30 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2015-11-03 14:32 ` Jiri Olsa
2015-11-03 15:11 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2015-11-03 7:37 ` Jiri Olsa
2015-11-03 11:25 ` Milian Wolff
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151102211944.GR2923@kernel.org \
--to=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=milian.wolff@kdab.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.