From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8EBC433F5 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:53:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230101AbiDNLz2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2022 07:55:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60312 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235031AbiDNLz1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2022 07:55:27 -0400 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4601:e00::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59B7C6211D; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 04:53:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03219B82921; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:53:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74976C385A1; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:53:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1649937180; bh=CfAU/8BLQZf/z4UTLjwFtFdwDKxtlWOO615gu89IVos=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=lOMredMovFi2z1Dq2qSiGbT066bYK7ftxLfE7AR+rclIpgNyyeXwZj28HnpI7M3x8 Q5Z5x7OjySsPRhaRmLjsJas8dFSyh+/yhmIAfcvMtp3HirnDMB04+hDjJw9jJMh6MO 6ur2Gti5yOGsoIA6hI5+Xrwzjq1F4NbZDSNju1WJcEJudR2igCSPqACALJJIURm6ht XMcWy9jiBX5OdJUYYhfwVJCAftMC9sgCJJKWp1j4oWjfDI+GeHqp4bIaOTuxHc81Ta RZHnRVaOzNHb5vN6DYV+I5sVKfBgWmmeSf1CHIp7f1X/2Y7YMiXgJnDHIUxL94NpNd Zml132wL19Fsg== Received: by quaco.ghostprotocols.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C655440407; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:52:57 -0300 (-03) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:52:57 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Leo Yan Cc: James Clark , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Ravi Bangoria , German Gomez , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf report: Set PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC bit for Arm SPE event Message-ID: References: <20220413092317.756022-1-leo.yan@linaro.org> <9ad30442-41f8-6e17-cb4a-ab102b3ebd69@arm.com> <20220414110124.GB598831@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220414110124.GB598831@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Em Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 07:01:24PM +0800, Leo Yan escreveu: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 11:29:48AM +0100, James Clark wrote: > > On 14/04/2022 02:27, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 05:23:17PM +0800, Leo Yan escreveu: > > >> Since commit bb30acae4c4d ("perf report: Bail out --mem-mode if mem info > > >> is not available") "perf mem report" and "perf report --mem-mode" > > >> don't report result if the PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC bit is missed in sample > > >> type. > > >> > > >> The commit ffab48705205 ("perf: arm-spe: Fix perf report --mem-mode") > > >> partially fixes the issue. It adds PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC bit for Arm SPE > > >> event, this allows the perf data file generated by kernel v5.18-rc1 or > > >> later version can be reported properly. > > >> > > >> On the other hand, perf tool still fails to be backward compatibility > > >> for a data file recorded by an older version's perf which contains Arm > > >> SPE trace data. This patch is a workaround in reporting phase, when > > >> detects ARM SPE PMU event and without PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC bit, it will > > >> force to set the bit in the sample type and give a warning info. > > >> > > >> Fixes: bb30acae4c4d ("perf report: Bail out --mem-mode if mem info is not available") > > >> Signed-off-by: Leo Yan > > >> Tested-by: German Gomez > > >> --- > > >> v2: Change event name from "arm_spe_" to "arm_spe"; > > >> Add German's test tag. > > > > > > Tentatively applied, would be great to have James' and Ravi's > > > Acked-by/Reviewed-by, which I'll add before pushing this out if provided > > > in time. > > > > > > - Arnaldo > > > > > >> tools/perf/builtin-report.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > > >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-report.c b/tools/perf/builtin-report.c > > >> index 1ad75c7ba074..acb07a4a9b67 100644 > > >> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-report.c > > >> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-report.c > > >> @@ -353,6 +353,7 @@ static int report__setup_sample_type(struct report *rep) > > >> struct perf_session *session = rep->session; > > >> u64 sample_type = evlist__combined_sample_type(session->evlist); > > >> bool is_pipe = perf_data__is_pipe(session->data); > > >> + struct evsel *evsel; > > >> > > >> if (session->itrace_synth_opts->callchain || > > >> session->itrace_synth_opts->add_callchain || > > >> @@ -407,6 +408,21 @@ static int report__setup_sample_type(struct report *rep) > > >> } > > >> > > >> if (sort__mode == SORT_MODE__MEMORY) { > > >> + /* > > >> + * FIXUP: prior to kernel 5.18, Arm SPE missed to set > > >> + * PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC bit in sample type. For backward > > >> + * compatibility, set the bit if it's an old perf data file. > > >> + */ > > >> + evlist__for_each_entry(session->evlist, evsel) { > > >> + if (strstr(evsel->name, "arm_spe") && > > >> + !(sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC)) { > > >> + ui__warning("PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC bit is not set " > > >> + "for Arm SPE event.\n"); > > > > Looks ok to me. Personally I would remove the warning, otherwise people are going to start > > thinking that they need to do something about it or something bad has happened. > > > > But because we've fixed it up there shouldn't really need to be a warning or any action. > > Understand. The warning is not bad for developers but it might > introduce confusion for users, and if we really want to check the sample > type then we can use 'perf evlist' command, so it's not very useful for > the warning. > > I will remove the warning and resend a new patch. Waiting then > > I don't feel too strongly about this though, so I will leave it up to Leo to make the > > final decision: > > > > Reviewed-by: James Clark > > Thanks a lot for reviewing. > Leo -- - Arnaldo