Re: [PATCH v3 07/10] perf: arm_spe: Add support for filtering on data source

James Clark
2025-07-15T14:19:36Z

On 14/07/2025 3:04 pm, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 11:49:05AM +0100, James Clark wrote:
>> SPE_FEAT_FDS adds the ability to filter on the data source of packets.
>> Like the other existing filters, enable filtering with PMSFCR_EL1.FDS
>> when any of the filter bits are set.
>>
>> Each bit maps to data sources 0-63 described by bits[0:5] in the data
>> source packet (although the full range of data source is 16 bits so
>> higher value data sources can't be filtered on). The filter is an OR of
>> all the bits, so for example setting bits 0 and 3 filters packets from
>> data sources 0 OR 3.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>
>> Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
>> index 9309b846f642..d04318411f77 100644
>> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
>> @@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ struct arm_spe_pmu {
>> #define SPE_PMU_FEAT_INV_FILT_EVT (1UL << 6)
>> #define SPE_PMU_FEAT_DISCARD (1UL << 7)
>> #define SPE_PMU_FEAT_EFT (1UL << 8)
>> +#define SPE_PMU_FEAT_FDS (1UL << 9)
>> #define SPE_PMU_FEAT_DEV_PROBED (1UL << 63)
>> u64 features;
>>
>> @@ -232,6 +233,10 @@ static const struct attribute_group arm_spe_pmu_cap_group = {
>> #define ATTR_CFG_FLD_inv_event_filter_LO 0
>> #define ATTR_CFG_FLD_inv_event_filter_HI 63
>>
>> +#define ATTR_CFG_FLD_data_src_filter_CFG config4 /* PMSDSFR_EL1 */
>> +#define ATTR_CFG_FLD_data_src_filter_LO 0
>> +#define ATTR_CFG_FLD_data_src_filter_HI 63
>> +
>> GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(ts_enable);
>> GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(pa_enable);
>> GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(pct_enable);
>> @@ -248,6 +253,7 @@ GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(float_filter);
>> GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(float_filter_mask);
>> GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(event_filter);
>> GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(inv_event_filter);
>> +GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(data_src_filter);
>> GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(min_latency);
>> GEN_PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(discard);
>>
>> @@ -268,6 +274,7 @@ static struct attribute *arm_spe_pmu_formats_attr[] = {
>> &format_attr_float_filter_mask.attr,
>> &format_attr_event_filter.attr,
>> &format_attr_inv_event_filter.attr,
>> + &format_attr_data_src_filter.attr,
>> &format_attr_min_latency.attr,
>> &format_attr_discard.attr,
>> NULL,
>> @@ -286,6 +293,9 @@ static umode_t arm_spe_pmu_format_attr_is_visible(struct kobject *kobj,
>> if (attr == &format_attr_inv_event_filter.attr && !(spe_pmu->features & SPE_PMU_FEAT_INV_FILT_EVT))
>> return 0;
>>
>> + if (attr == &format_attr_data_src_filter.attr && !(spe_pmu->features & SPE_PMU_FEAT_FDS))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> if ((attr == &format_attr_branch_filter_mask.attr ||
>> attr == &format_attr_load_filter_mask.attr ||
>> attr == &format_attr_store_filter_mask.attr ||
>> @@ -406,6 +416,9 @@ static u64 arm_spe_event_to_pmsfcr(struct perf_event *event)
>> if (ATTR_CFG_GET_FLD(attr, inv_event_filter))
>> reg |= PMSFCR_EL1_FnE;
>>
>> + if (ATTR_CFG_GET_FLD(attr, data_src_filter))
>> + reg |= PMSFCR_EL1_FDS;
>
> Is the polarity correct here? The description of PMSDSFR_EL1.S<m> suggests
> that setting bits to 1 _excludes_ the FDS filtering.
>

Setting filter bits to 1 means that samples matching are included.
Setting bits to 0 means that they are excluded. And PMSFCR_EL1.FDS
enables filtering as a whole, so if the user sets any filter bit to 1 we
want to enable filtering:

PMSDSFR_EL1.S<m>

0b0 If PMSFCR_EL1.FDS is 1, do not record load operations that have
bits [5:0] of the Data Source packet set to <m>.

0b1 Load operations with Data Source <m> are unaffected by
PMSFCR_EL1.FDS.

I think it's all the right way around and it ends up being the same as
the other filters in SPE. Because we're using any bit being set to
enable the filtering, the only thing you can't do is enable filtering
with a 0 filter, but I didn't think that was useful. See the previous
discussion on this here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/5752f039-51c1-4452-b5df-03ff06da7be3@linaro.org/

Reading the "Data source filtering" section in the docs change at the
end might help too.

>> if (ATTR_CFG_GET_FLD(attr, min_latency))
>> reg |= PMSFCR_EL1_FL;
>>
>> @@ -430,6 +443,12 @@ static u64 arm_spe_event_to_pmslatfr(struct perf_event *event)
>> return FIELD_PREP(PMSLATFR_EL1_MINLAT, ATTR_CFG_GET_FLD(attr, min_latency));
>> }
>>
>> +static u64 arm_spe_event_to_pmsdsfr(struct perf_event *event)
>> +{
>> + struct perf_event_attr *attr = &event->attr;
>> + return ATTR_CFG_GET_FLD(attr, data_src_filter);
>> +}
>> +
>> static void arm_spe_pmu_pad_buf(struct perf_output_handle *handle, int len)
>> {
>> struct arm_spe_pmu_buf *buf = perf_get_aux(handle);
>> @@ -788,6 +807,10 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event *event)
>> if (arm_spe_event_to_pmsnevfr(event) & arm_spe_pmsevfr_res0(spe_pmu->pmsver))
>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>
>> + if (arm_spe_event_to_pmsdsfr(event) &&
>> + !(spe_pmu->features & SPE_PMU_FEAT_FDS))
>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> Same question here.
>
> Will