From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Indu Bhagat <indu.bhagat@oracle.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org, Jordan Rome <jordalgo@meta.com>,
Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>,
Jens Remus <jremus@linux.ibm.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Weinan Liu <wnliu@google.com>,
Blake Jones <blakejones@google.com>,
Beau Belgrave <beaub@linux.microsoft.com>,
"Jose E. Marchesi" <jemarch@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/17] perf: Support deferred user callchains
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 13:42:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aA_oJ7tgGv-H4ocX@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250425125815.5c5b33be@gandalf.local.home>
On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 12:58:15PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:24:47 -0700
> Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * Returns:
> > > +* > 0 : if already queued.
> > > + * 0 : if it performed the queuing
> > > + * < 0 : if it did not get queued.
> > > + */
> > > +static int deferred_request(struct perf_event *event)
> > > +{
> > > + struct callback_head *work = &event->pending_unwind_work;
> > > + int pending;
> > > + int ret;
> >
> > I'm not sure if it works for per-CPU events. The event is shared so any
> > task can request the deferred callchains. Does it handle if task A
> > requests one and scheduled out before going to the user mode, and task B
> > on the CPU also requests another after that? I'm afraid not..
>
> I was afraid of that.
>
> This is no different that what Josh did in his last set in v4. I'm guessing
> the issue is running with "-a", correct?
Yes.
>
> Could we just not use deferred when running with "-a" for now? Or could we
> possibly just make the deferred stacktrace its own event? Have it be
> possible that perf just registers a signal instance with the deferred
> unwinding logic, and then perf can handle where to write the information. I
> don't know perf well enough to implement that.
Even if it excludes per-CPU events, per-task events also can attach to a
CPU and that's the default behavior of the perf record IIRC. In that
case, it needs to be careful when it accesses the event since the task
can migrate to another CPU. So I'm not sure if it's a good idea to
track event that requested the deferred callchains.
Also it doesn't need to emit duplicate deferred callchains if a task
has multiple events and they are requesting callchains. Unfortunately,
the kernel cannot know which events are related or profiled together.
Hmm.. maybe we can add a cookie to the event itself (by ioctl or
something) in order to group events in a profiling session and then use
that for deferred callchains? Task should maintain a list of active
cookies (or sessions) somehow but then perf can check if the current CPU
has events with matching cookies and emit a deferred callchain.
>
> Josh's code had it call the unwind_deferred_init() and just used its own
> event to callback to and that was called on hundreds of events when I ran:
>
> perf record -g <whatever>
>
> Same if I added the "-a" option.
>
> The above function return values came from Josh's code:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jpoimboe/linux.git/tree/kernel/unwind/deferred.c?h=sframe#n173
>
> I just moved it out of deferred.c and into perf itself, and removed the
> cookie logic.
>
> >
> > > +
> > > + if (!current->mm || !user_mode(task_pt_regs(current)))
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> >
> > Does it mean it cannot use deferred callstack when it's in the kernel
> > mode like during a syscall?
>
> task_pt_regs(current) will return the regs from when the task entered the
> kernel. So the answer is no, it will still trace if an interrupt happened
> while a task is in a system call.
Ok, thanks for the explanation. The the user_mode check was for kernel
threads, right?
Thanks,
Namhyung
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-28 20:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-24 16:25 [PATCH v5 00/17] perf: Deferred unwinding of user space stack traces Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 01/17] unwind_user: Add user space unwinding API Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 02/17] unwind_user: Add frame pointer support Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 03/17] unwind_user/x86: Enable frame pointer unwinding on x86 Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 04/17] perf/x86: Rename and move get_segment_base() and make it global Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 05/17] unwind_user: Add compat mode frame pointer support Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 06/17] unwind_user/x86: Enable compat mode frame pointer unwinding on x86 Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 07/17] unwind_user/deferred: Add unwind_deferred_trace() Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 08/17] unwind_user/deferred: Add unwind cache Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 19:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 09/17] perf: Remove get_perf_callchain() init_nr argument Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 10/17] perf: Have get_perf_callchain() return NULL if crosstask and user are set Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 11/17] perf: Simplify get_perf_callchain() user logic Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-24 17:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 17:42 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-04-24 17:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-04-25 7:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 12/17] perf: Skip user unwind if !current->mm Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-24 17:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 13/17] perf: Support deferred user callchains Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-24 17:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-04-25 15:24 ` Namhyung Kim
2025-04-25 16:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-04-28 20:42 ` Namhyung Kim [this message]
2025-04-28 22:02 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-04-29 0:29 ` Namhyung Kim
2025-04-29 14:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-05-08 16:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-05-08 18:44 ` Namhyung Kim
2025-05-08 18:49 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-05-08 18:54 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-05-09 12:23 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2025-05-09 15:45 ` Namhyung Kim
2025-05-09 15:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 14/17] perf tools: Minimal CALLCHAIN_DEFERRED support Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 15/17] perf record: Enable defer_callchain for user callchains Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 16/17] perf script: Display PERF_RECORD_CALLCHAIN_DEFERRED Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 16:25 ` [PATCH v5 17/17] perf tools: Merge deferred user callchains Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 17:04 ` [PATCH v5 00/17] perf: Deferred unwinding of user space stack traces Steven Rostedt
2025-04-24 18:32 ` Miguel Ojeda
2025-04-24 18:41 ` Steven Rostedt
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=aA_oJ7tgGv-H4ocX@google.com \
--to=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=beaub@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=blakejones@google.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=indu.bhagat@oracle.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jemarch@gnu.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=jordalgo@meta.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=jremus@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sam@gentoo.org \
--cc=wnliu@google.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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).