All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@arm.com>
Cc: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	perf group <linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf annotate: fix parsing aarch64 branch instructions after objdump update
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:50:49 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180827125049.GD22309@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180823191047.9260992844205984b75e6721@arm.com>

Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 07:10:47PM -0500, Kim Phillips escreveu:
> Starting with binutils 2.28, aarch64 objdump adds comments to the
> disassembly output to show the alternative names of a condition code [1].
> 
> It is assumed that commas in objdump comments could occur in other arches
> now or in the future, so this fix is arch-independent.
> 
> The fix could have been done with arm64 specific jump__parse and
> jump__scnprintf functions, but the jump__scnprintf instruction would
> have to have its comment character be a literal, since the scnprintf
> functions cannot receive a struct arch easily.
> 
> This inconvenience also applies to the generic jump__scnprintf, which
> is why we add a raw_comment pointer to struct ins_operands, so the
> __parse function assigns it to be re-used by its corresponding __scnprintf
> function.
> 
> Example differences in 'perf annotate --stdio2' output on an
> aarch64 perf.data file:
> 
> BEFORE: → b.cs   ffff200008133d1c <unwind_frame+0x18c>  // b.hs, dffff7ecc47b
> AFTER : ↓ b.cs   18c
> 
> BEFORE: → b.cc   ffff200008d8d9cc <get_alloc_profile+0x31c>  // b.lo, b.ul, dffff727295b
> AFTER : ↓ b.cc   31c
> 
> The branch target labels 18c and 31c also now appear in the output:
> 
> BEFORE:        add    x26, x29, #0x80
> AFTER : 18c:   add    x26, x29, #0x80
> 
> BEFORE:        add    x21, x21, #0x8
> AFTER : 31c:   add    x21, x21, #0x8
> 
> The Fixes: tag below is added so stable branches will get the update; it
> doesn't necessarily mean that commit was broken at the time, rather it
> didn't withstand the aarch64 objdump update.
> 
> Tested no difference in output for sample x86_64, power arch perf.data files.
> 
> [1] https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=bb7eff5206e4795ac79c177a80fe9f4630aaf730
> 
> Cc: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
> Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
> Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
> Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> Fixes: b13bbeee5ee6 ("perf annotate: Fix branch instruction with multiple operands")
> Signed-off-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@arm.com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/annotate.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>  tools/perf/util/annotate.h |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> index e32ead4744bd..b83897dafbb0 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> @@ -282,7 +282,8 @@ bool ins__is_call(const struct ins *ins)
>  	return ins->ops == &call_ops || ins->ops == &s390_call_ops;
>  }
>  
> -static int jump__parse(struct arch *arch __maybe_unused, struct ins_operands *ops, struct map_symbol *ms)
> +static int jump__parse(struct arch *arch, struct ins_operands *ops,
> +		       struct map_symbol *ms)

Try to refrain from reflowing, what you need to do here is just to
remove that __maybe_unused.

>  {
>  	struct map *map = ms->map;
>  	struct symbol *sym = ms->sym;
> @@ -291,6 +292,15 @@ static int jump__parse(struct arch *arch __maybe_unused, struct ins_operands *op
>  	};
>  	const char *c = strchr(ops->raw, ',');
>  	u64 start, end;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Prevent from matching commas in the comment section, e.g.:
> +	 * ffff200008446e70:       b.cs    ffff2000084470f4 <generic_exec_single+0x314>  // b.hs, b.nlast
> +	 */
> +	ops->raw_comment = strchr(ops->raw, arch->objdump.comment_char);
> +	if (c && ops->raw_comment && c > ops->raw_comment)
> +		c = NULL;
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * Examples of lines to parse for the _cpp_lex_token@@Base
>  	 * function:
> @@ -367,6 +377,11 @@ static int jump__scnprintf(struct ins *ins, char *bf, size_t size,
>  		return scnprintf(bf, size, "%-6s %s", ins->name, ops->target.sym->name);
>  
>  	c = strchr(ops->raw, ',');
> +
> +	/* Prevent from matching commas in the comment section */
> +	if (ops->raw_comment && c && c > ops->raw_comment)
> +		c = NULL;

This is equivalent to the previous test, but why do it differently?

Since both are open coded equivalents, why not do something like:

	c = validate_comma(c, ops);

That would translate to:

static inline const char *validate_comma(const char *c, ops)
{
	return c > ops->raw_comment ? NULL : c;
}

Which should be a third equivalent form to check if c, having been
found, is after ops->raw_comment, if there is a raw_comment?

- Arnaldo

> +
>  	if (c != NULL) {
>  		const char *c2 = strchr(c + 1, ',');
>  
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/annotate.h b/tools/perf/util/annotate.h
> index 005a5fe8a8c6..5399ba2321bb 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/annotate.h
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate.h
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ struct ins {
>  
>  struct ins_operands {
>  	char	*raw;
> +	char	*raw_comment;
>  	struct {
>  		char	*raw;
>  		char	*name;
> -- 
> 2.17.1

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: acme@kernel.org (Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] perf annotate: fix parsing aarch64 branch instructions after objdump update
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:50:49 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180827125049.GD22309@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180823191047.9260992844205984b75e6721@arm.com>

Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 07:10:47PM -0500, Kim Phillips escreveu:
> Starting with binutils 2.28, aarch64 objdump adds comments to the
> disassembly output to show the alternative names of a condition code [1].
> 
> It is assumed that commas in objdump comments could occur in other arches
> now or in the future, so this fix is arch-independent.
> 
> The fix could have been done with arm64 specific jump__parse and
> jump__scnprintf functions, but the jump__scnprintf instruction would
> have to have its comment character be a literal, since the scnprintf
> functions cannot receive a struct arch easily.
> 
> This inconvenience also applies to the generic jump__scnprintf, which
> is why we add a raw_comment pointer to struct ins_operands, so the
> __parse function assigns it to be re-used by its corresponding __scnprintf
> function.
> 
> Example differences in 'perf annotate --stdio2' output on an
> aarch64 perf.data file:
> 
> BEFORE: ? b.cs   ffff200008133d1c <unwind_frame+0x18c>  // b.hs, dffff7ecc47b
> AFTER : ? b.cs   18c
> 
> BEFORE: ? b.cc   ffff200008d8d9cc <get_alloc_profile+0x31c>  // b.lo, b.ul, dffff727295b
> AFTER : ? b.cc   31c
> 
> The branch target labels 18c and 31c also now appear in the output:
> 
> BEFORE:        add    x26, x29, #0x80
> AFTER : 18c:   add    x26, x29, #0x80
> 
> BEFORE:        add    x21, x21, #0x8
> AFTER : 31c:   add    x21, x21, #0x8
> 
> The Fixes: tag below is added so stable branches will get the update; it
> doesn't necessarily mean that commit was broken at the time, rather it
> didn't withstand the aarch64 objdump update.
> 
> Tested no difference in output for sample x86_64, power arch perf.data files.
> 
> [1] https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=bb7eff5206e4795ac79c177a80fe9f4630aaf730
> 
> Cc: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
> Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
> Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
> Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> Fixes: b13bbeee5ee6 ("perf annotate: Fix branch instruction with multiple operands")
> Signed-off-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@arm.com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/annotate.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>  tools/perf/util/annotate.h |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> index e32ead4744bd..b83897dafbb0 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> @@ -282,7 +282,8 @@ bool ins__is_call(const struct ins *ins)
>  	return ins->ops == &call_ops || ins->ops == &s390_call_ops;
>  }
>  
> -static int jump__parse(struct arch *arch __maybe_unused, struct ins_operands *ops, struct map_symbol *ms)
> +static int jump__parse(struct arch *arch, struct ins_operands *ops,
> +		       struct map_symbol *ms)

Try to refrain from reflowing, what you need to do here is just to
remove that __maybe_unused.

>  {
>  	struct map *map = ms->map;
>  	struct symbol *sym = ms->sym;
> @@ -291,6 +292,15 @@ static int jump__parse(struct arch *arch __maybe_unused, struct ins_operands *op
>  	};
>  	const char *c = strchr(ops->raw, ',');
>  	u64 start, end;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Prevent from matching commas in the comment section, e.g.:
> +	 * ffff200008446e70:       b.cs    ffff2000084470f4 <generic_exec_single+0x314>  // b.hs, b.nlast
> +	 */
> +	ops->raw_comment = strchr(ops->raw, arch->objdump.comment_char);
> +	if (c && ops->raw_comment && c > ops->raw_comment)
> +		c = NULL;
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * Examples of lines to parse for the _cpp_lex_token@@Base
>  	 * function:
> @@ -367,6 +377,11 @@ static int jump__scnprintf(struct ins *ins, char *bf, size_t size,
>  		return scnprintf(bf, size, "%-6s %s", ins->name, ops->target.sym->name);
>  
>  	c = strchr(ops->raw, ',');
> +
> +	/* Prevent from matching commas in the comment section */
> +	if (ops->raw_comment && c && c > ops->raw_comment)
> +		c = NULL;

This is equivalent to the previous test, but why do it differently?

Since both are open coded equivalents, why not do something like:

	c = validate_comma(c, ops);

That would translate to:

static inline const char *validate_comma(const char *c, ops)
{
	return c > ops->raw_comment ? NULL : c;
}

Which should be a third equivalent form to check if c, having been
found, is after ops->raw_comment, if there is a raw_comment?

- Arnaldo

> +
>  	if (c != NULL) {
>  		const char *c2 = strchr(c + 1, ',');
>  
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/annotate.h b/tools/perf/util/annotate.h
> index 005a5fe8a8c6..5399ba2321bb 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/annotate.h
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate.h
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ struct ins {
>  
>  struct ins_operands {
>  	char	*raw;
> +	char	*raw_comment;
>  	struct {
>  		char	*raw;
>  		char	*name;
> -- 
> 2.17.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-08-27 12:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-24  0:10 [PATCH] perf annotate: fix parsing aarch64 branch instructions after objdump update Kim Phillips
2018-08-24  0:10 ` Kim Phillips
2018-08-24  0:10 ` Kim Phillips
2018-08-24  7:59 ` Thomas-Mich Richter
2018-08-24  7:59   ` Thomas-Mich Richter
2018-08-24 21:45   ` Kim Phillips
2018-08-24 21:45     ` Kim Phillips
2018-08-24 21:45     ` Kim Phillips
2018-08-27 12:50 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
2018-08-27 12:50   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2018-08-27 17:53   ` [PATCH v2] " Kim Phillips
2018-08-27 17:53     ` Kim Phillips
2018-08-30 18:47     ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2018-08-30 18:47       ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2018-09-06 13:07     ` [tip:perf/core] perf annotate: Fix " tip-bot for Kim Phillips

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=20180827125049.GD22309@kernel.org \
    --to=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=kim.phillips@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=treeze.taeung@gmail.com \
    /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.