From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Eranian Stephane <eranian@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@intel.com>, Zide Chen <zide.chen@intel.com>,
Falcon Thomas <thomas.falcon@intel.com>,
Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@intel.com>,
Gennady Kupava <gennady.kupava@gmail.com>,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf/x86: Disable precise sampling for PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 12:19:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260908101914.GQ4121339@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1691a05c-49a6-4b16-8bad-cb3c004ed07c@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, Sep 08, 2026 at 04:56:22PM +0800, Mi, Dapeng wrote:
>
> On 9/8/2026 4:49 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2026 at 03:51:02PM +0800, Dapeng Mi wrote:
> >> PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER needs to return the user stack and user registers
> >> to user space when the PMI exits. Since the skid from the PEBS/IBS sample
> >> and PMI delivery, the PEBS/IBS register snapshot (especially IP/SP/BP)
> >> can diverge from the user stack at PMI return. That mismatch breaks DWARF
> >> unwinding.
> >>
> >> Precise sampling provides no benefit in this case, so disable PEBS/IBS
> >> precise sampling and allow only PMI-based sampling when
> >> PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER is requested.
> >>
> >> Reported-by: Gennady Kupava <gennady.kupava@gmail.com>
> >> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAPu-DQqF0aF6=GS8Z6KKWeeX_V5LiXeKU_rJQZC+uGg8zuTPNw@mail.gmail.com/
> >> Cc: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>
> >> Fixes: c5ebcedb566e ("perf: Add ability to attach user stack dump to sample")
> >> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
> > This breaks long standing existing behaviour.
>
> Yeah, but it seems there is no better way to fix this issue.
Breaking things that worked before isn't fixing.. people get upset.
> An alternative way to fix this issue is still to return the PMI
> context register state rather than the PEBS precise registers for user
> stack sampling, but this actually falls back the imprecise PMI-based
> sampling.
That's what we already do, no? I have distinct memories of making the
stack unwind use the NMI regs rather then the PEBS regs.
> In my opinion, it could even make the thing worse. User
> requires to get precise samplings, but perf silently returns imprecise
> records, this would mislead user.
Mostly just the unwind might be off a little, the rest is accurate. This
has been the case 'forever'. Performance analysis isn't for silly
people, if they can't deal with a little fuzz then perhaps they're in
the wrong business.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-08 10:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-08 7:51 [PATCH 1/2] perf/x86/intel: Correct pt_regs->flags update for PEBS path Dapeng Mi
2026-09-08 7:51 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf/x86: Disable precise sampling for PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER Dapeng Mi
2026-09-08 8:15 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-08 8:47 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-08 8:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-08 8:56 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-08 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-09-08 15:10 ` Andi Kleen
2026-09-08 20:56 ` Ian Rogers
2026-09-09 0:59 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-09 1:28 ` Ravi Bangoria
2026-09-09 1:59 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-09 8:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-09 9:36 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-09 19:30 ` Namhyung Kim
2026-09-10 0:12 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-09 14:14 ` Namhyung Kim
2026-09-09 1:20 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-08 8:49 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-09-08 8:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf/x86/intel: Correct pt_regs->flags update for PEBS path sashiko-bot
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=20260908101914.GQ4121339@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dapeng1.mi@intel.com \
--cc=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=gennady.kupava@gmail.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=ravi.bangoria@amd.com \
--cc=thomas.falcon@intel.com \
--cc=xudong.hao@intel.com \
--cc=zide.chen@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox