From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>,
James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf intel-pt: Fix the pipe mode (v1)
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:35:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5676a1b7-885c-e8d9-1809-8bedcf1ff995@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y9fREY3BxROqYYBO@kernel.org>
On 30/01/23 16:15, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 02:54:36PM -0800, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 11:22 PM Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 27/01/23 02:19, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I found some problems in Intel-PT and auxtrace in general with pipe.
>>>> In the past it used to work with pipe, but recent code fails.
>>>
>>> Pipe mode is a problem for Intel PT and possibly other auxtrace users.
>>> Essentially the auxtrace buffers do not behave like the regular perf
>>> event buffers. That is because the head and tail are updated by
>>> software, but in the auxtrace case the data is written by hardware.
>>> So the head and tail do not get updated as data is written. In the
>>> Intel PT case, the head and tail are updated only when the trace is
>>> disabled by software, for example:
>>> - full-trace, system wide : when buffer passes watermark
>>> - full-trace, not system-wide : when buffer passes watermark or
>>> context switches
>>> - snapshot mode : as above but also when a snapshot is made
>>> - sample mode : as above but also when a sample is made
>>>
>>> That means finished-round ordering doesn't work. An auxtrace buffer
>>> can turn up that has data that extends back in time, possibly to the
>>> very beginning of tracing.
>>
>> Ok, IIUC we want to process the main buffer and auxtrace buffer
>> together in time order but there's no guarantee to get the auxtrace
>> data in time, right?
Yes
>>
>> I wonder if it's possible to use 2 pass processing for pipe mode.
>> We may keep the events in the ordered queue and auxtrace queue
>> in the first pass, and process together from the beginning in the
>> second pass. But I guess the data size would be a problem.
>>
>> Or, assuming that the auxtrace buffer comes later than (or equal to)
>> the main buffer, we may start processing the main buffer as soon as
>> every auxtrace queue gets some data. Thoughts?
That sounds like it would require figuring out a timestamp up to
which there is Intel PT trace data in all queues. That would
be very complicated.
>>
>>>
>>> For a perf.data file, that problem is solved by going through the trace
>>> and queuing up the auxtrace buffers in advance.
>>>
>>> For pipe mode, the order of events and timestamps can presumably
>>> be messed up.
>>>
>>> For Intel PT, it is a bit of a surprise that there is not
>>> validation to error out in pipe mode.
>>
>> What kind of validation do you have in mind? Checking pid/tid?
Validation to kill pipe mode for Intel PT entirely. But a warning
is ok.
>>
>>>
>>> At the least, a warning is needed, and the above explanation needs
>>> to be added to the documentation.
>>
>> Thanks, I'll add it to the documentation.
>
> Ok, so I'll wait for v2 of this patch series, Adrian, apart from what
> you mentioned, are you ok with the patches, or a subset of them? The
> first ones looks ok, right?
Yes they are ok.
>
> - Arnaldo
>
>> How about showing something like this for pipe mode?
>>
>> WARNING: Intel-PT with pipe mode may not work correctly.
Perhaps:
WARNING: Intel PT with pipe mode is not recommended. The output cannot be relied upon. In particular, time stamps and the order of events may be incorrect.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Namhyung
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> As it
>>>> also touches the generic code, other auxtrace users like ARM SPE will
>>>> be affected too. I added a test case to verify it works with pipes.
>>>>
>>>> At last, I can run this command without a problem.
>>>>
>>>> $ perf record -o- -e intel_pt// true | perf inject -b | perf report -i- --itrace=i1000
>>>>
>>>> The code is available at 'perf/auxtrace-pipe-v1' branch in
>>>>
>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/namhyung/linux-perf.git
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Namhyung
>>>>
>>>> Namhyung Kim (4):
>>>> perf inject: Use perf_data__read() for auxtrace
>>>> perf intel-pt: Do not try to queue auxtrace data on pipe
>>>> perf session: Avoid calling lseek(2) for pipe
>>>> perf test: Add pipe mode test to the Intel PT test suite
>>>>
>>>> tools/perf/builtin-inject.c | 6 +++---
>>>> tools/perf/tests/shell/test_intel_pt.sh | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>>> tools/perf/util/auxtrace.c | 3 +++
>>>> tools/perf/util/session.c | 9 +++++++--
>>>> 4 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> base-commit: 5670ebf54bd26482f57a094c53bdc562c106e0a9
>>>> prerequisite-patch-id: 4ccdf9c974a3909075051f4ffe498faecab7567b
>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-30 17:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-27 0:19 [PATCH 0/4] perf intel-pt: Fix the pipe mode (v1) Namhyung Kim
2023-01-27 0:19 ` [PATCH 1/4] perf inject: Use perf_data__read() for auxtrace Namhyung Kim
2023-01-27 0:19 ` [PATCH 2/4] perf intel-pt: Do not try to queue auxtrace data on pipe Namhyung Kim
2023-01-27 0:19 ` [PATCH 3/4] perf session: Avoid calling lseek(2) for pipe Namhyung Kim
2023-01-27 15:34 ` James Clark
2023-01-27 0:19 ` [PATCH 4/4] perf test: Add pipe mode test to the Intel PT test suite Namhyung Kim
2023-01-27 7:22 ` [PATCH 0/4] perf intel-pt: Fix the pipe mode (v1) Adrian Hunter
2023-01-27 14:42 ` James Clark
2023-01-27 23:08 ` Namhyung Kim
2023-01-30 10:56 ` James Clark
2023-01-31 2:13 ` Namhyung Kim
2023-01-27 22:54 ` Namhyung Kim
2023-01-30 14:15 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2023-01-30 17:35 ` Adrian Hunter [this message]
2023-01-31 2:19 ` Namhyung Kim
2023-01-27 15:32 ` James Clark
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=5676a1b7-885c-e8d9-1809-8bedcf1ff995@intel.com \
--to=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@arm.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=leo.yan@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).