From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E318746AF10; Tue, 16 Jun 2026 15:57:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781625466; cv=none; b=BXfZNo1ZblqkhRU8zaZ6CvarXJV/vkTN87ZUV+ez5LOFymWVhknC1JsWs7qnquR297TS2mpfFUwhHnDKXzOejxE38yVK8IwYEdgzPhx5sGuLV/ODVNBaZRl8w4gkgzrtHWyDyRvWZAgrAM1MBjoqS8WdyfofGhLzUN1AFlmjBsc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781625466; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xGU+zthPArmUciFE3I4/MTbw9lB8zAY6DEuEIIvSCT0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=qAPhFuLVZQA4gPBGb5ntRR4HG6eTXXvsz2dzcwiV/vOICFQxWUXdy9UEyYu0/tEJ7SyY06JkmXXWn7Vd+tMY+LegiZ3KvWNZFjJrLaXrhIiwwRcq+vuDo27/mz/TSGijm7hYp1bHmeiV878LGdQSQlHku1XuE4ouOSit9uA0JkQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=hvMrhoDs; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="hvMrhoDs" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9A96C1F000E9; Tue, 16 Jun 2026 15:57:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1781625464; bh=2I29sVWPGLqUjIDyjNAdYt3UxHapRuSjOGldiuvjnFA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=hvMrhoDsIv55pDkqtMQJkIvBvYtP03iTeGsHOKYQksDENhjkdvt9oTdqQ6yGdQlKd fOW7NTIQXoVV2mbxwF15GJj2IJpSsejIFL9HNkDRbSZFD9B1OlmtQycYJ0cmPFb0kw 1Drcf4CbSV259gNGECV3IW90U1lovSnbmhAnZjzVOeJdmOUuzeQZHBaE7xDofPcJez bpoflV05cCVyOiJfYSKL7WioHrVHh5WF6Lr+uKIfhwPi4LyznsS/UqeZCOcyyDPMYd PE0o/Au1LOj7t+lvbuOtwYQaM7iCDKtlhvp2DYc9ed78wZECHVpWozbf3kXeQz5nn5 lGQiaqEE3z8QA== From: Puranjay Mohan To: bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: Puranjay Mohan , Puranjay Mohan , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , John Fastabend , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Eduard Zingerman , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , Catalin Marinas , Leo Yan , Rob Herring , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Namhyung Kim , James Clark , Ian Rogers , Adrian Hunter , Shuah Khan , Breno Leitao , Ravi Bangoria , Stephane Eranian , Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi , Usama Arif , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com Subject: [PATCH v5 4/4] selftests/bpf: Adjust wasted entries threshold for ARM64 BRBE Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2026 08:57:09 -0700 Message-ID: <20260616155716.2631508-5-puranjay@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.53.0 In-Reply-To: <20260616155716.2631508-1-puranjay@kernel.org> References: <20260616155716.2631508-1-puranjay@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The get_branch_snapshot test checks that bpf_get_branch_snapshot() doesn't waste too many branch entries on infrastructure overhead. The threshold of < 10 was calibrated for x86 where about 7 entries are wasted. On ARM64, the BPF trampoline generates more branches than x86, resulting in about 13 wasted entries. The overhead comes from the BPF trampoline calling __bpf_prog_enter_recur which on ARM64 makes out-of-line calls to __rcu_read_lock and generates more conditional branches than x86: [#12] bpf_testmod_loop_test+0x40 -> bpf_trampoline_...+0x48 [#11] bpf_trampoline_...+0x68 -> __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x0 [#10] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x20 -> __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x118 [#09] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x154 -> __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x160 [#08] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x164 -> __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x2c [#07] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x2c -> __rcu_read_lock+0x0 [#06] __rcu_read_lock+0x18 -> __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x30 [#05] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x9c -> __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0xf0 [#04] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0xf4 -> __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0xa8 [#03] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0xb8 -> __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x100 [#02] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x114 -> bpf_trampoline_...+0x6c [#01] bpf_trampoline_...+0x78 -> bpf_prog_...test1+0x0 [#00] bpf_prog_...test1+0x58 -> arm_brbe_snapshot_branch_stack+0x0 Use an architecture-specific threshold of < 14 for ARM64 to accommodate this overhead while still detecting regressions. Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan --- .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_branch_snapshot.c | 13 +++++++++---- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_branch_snapshot.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_branch_snapshot.c index 0394a1156d99..8d1a3480767f 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_branch_snapshot.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_branch_snapshot.c @@ -116,13 +116,18 @@ void serial_test_get_branch_snapshot(void) ASSERT_GT(skel->bss->test1_hits, 6, "find_looptest_in_lbr"); - /* Given we stop LBR in software, we will waste a few entries. + /* Given we stop LBR/BRBE in software, we will waste a few entries. * But we should try to waste as few as possible entries. We are at - * about 7 on x86_64 systems. - * Add a check for < 10 so that we get heads-up when something - * changes and wastes too many entries. + * about 7 on x86_64 and about 13 on arm64 systems (the arm64 BPF + * trampoline generates more branches than x86_64). + * Add a check so that we get heads-up when something changes and + * wastes too many entries. */ +#if defined(__aarch64__) + ASSERT_LT(skel->bss->wasted_entries, 14, "check_wasted_entries"); +#else ASSERT_LT(skel->bss->wasted_entries, 10, "check_wasted_entries"); +#endif cleanup: get_branch_snapshot__destroy(skel); -- 2.53.0-Meta