All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] perf/core: fix restoring of Intel LBR call stack on a context switch
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 13:55:41 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aa8db567-d090-52cd-516b-e6c0002e5b23@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191015091617.GF2311@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>


On 15.10.2019 12:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 09:08:34AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
>>
>> Restore Intel LBR call stack from cloned inactive task perf context on
>> a context switch. This change inherently addresses inconsistency in LBR 
>> call stack data provided on a sample in record profiling mode for 
>> example like this:
>>
>>   $ perf record -N -B -T -R --call-graph lbr \
>>          -e cpu/period=0xcdfe60,event=0x3c,name=\'CPU_CLK_UNHALTED.THREAD\'/Duk \
>>          --clockid=monotonic_raw -- ./miniFE.x nx 25 ny 25 nz 25
>>
>> Let's assume threads A, B, C belonging to the same process. 
>> B and C are siblings of A and their perf contexts are treated as equivalent.
>> At some point B blocks on a futex (non preempt context switch).
>> B's LBRs are preserved at B's perf context task_ctx_data and B's events 
>> are removed from PMU and disabled. B's perf context becomes inactive.
>>
>> Later C gets on a cpu, runs, gets profiled and eventually switches to 
>> the awaken but not yet running B. The optimized context switch path is 
>> executed coping B's task_ctx_data to C's one and updating B's perf context 
>> pointer to refer to C's task_ctx_data that contains preserved B's LBRs 
>> after coping.
>>
>> However, as far B's perf context is inactive there is no enabled events
>> in there and B's task_ctx_data->lbr_callstack_users is equal to 0.
>> When B gets on the cpu B's events reviving is skipped following
>> the optimized context switch path and B's task_ctx_data->lbr_callstack_users
>> remains 0. Thus B's LBR's are not restored by pmu sched_task() code called 
>> in the end of perf context switch sched_in callback for B.
>>
>> In the report that manifests as having short fragments of B's
>> call stack, still tracked by LBR's HW between adjacent samples,
>> but the whole thread call tree doesn't aggregate.
>>
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>  kernel/events/core.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
>> index 2aad959e6def..74c2ff38e079 100644
>> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
>> @@ -3181,7 +3181,7 @@ static void perf_event_context_sched_out(struct task_struct *task, int ctxn,
>>  
>>  	rcu_read_lock();
>>  	next_ctx = next->perf_event_ctxp[ctxn];
>> -	if (!next_ctx)
>> +	if (!next_ctx || !next_ctx->is_active)
>>  		goto unlock;
> 
> AFAICT this completely kills off the optimization. next_ctx->is_active
> cannot be set at this point.

Hmm, the intention was to skip optimization path only once when switching 
to just resumed thread. Thanks for observation.

~Alexey

      reply	other threads:[~2019-10-15 10:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-14  6:08 [PATCH v1] perf/core: fix restoring of Intel LBR call stack on a context switch Alexey Budankov
2019-10-15  9:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-10-15 10:55   ` Alexey Budankov [this message]

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=aa8db567-d090-52cd-516b-e6c0002e5b23@linux.intel.com \
    --to=alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.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.