From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3rZqwd4lTyzDq60 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:37:21 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.11/8.16.0.11) with SMTP id u5N5So9J074088 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:37:19 -0400 Received: from e28smtp05.in.ibm.com (e28smtp05.in.ibm.com [125.16.236.5]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 23q6r5b496-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 01:37:19 -0400 Received: from localhost by e28smtp05.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:07:15 +0530 Received: from d28relay04.in.ibm.com (d28relay04.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.61]) by d28dlp03.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4410A1258063 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:09:50 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av05.in.ibm.com (d28av05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.67]) by d28relay04.in.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u5N5aQQd19726652 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:06:26 +0530 Received: from d28av05.in.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d28av05.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u5N5b76Y032541 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:07:12 +0530 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] tools/perf: Fix the mask in regs_dump__printf and print_sample_iregs To: Yury Norov References: <1466658076-22928-1-git-send-email-maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20160623051824.GC13449@yury-N73SV> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Adrian Hunter , Kan Liang , Wang Nan , Michael Ellerman From: Madhavan Srinivasan Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:06:50 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160623051824.GC13449@yury-N73SV> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Message-Id: List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thursday 23 June 2016 10:48 AM, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:31:16AM +0530, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote: >> When decoding the perf_regs mask in regs_dump__printf(), >> we loop through the mask using find_first_bit and find_next_bit functions. >> "mask" is of type "u64", but sent as a "unsigned long *" to >> lib functions along with sizeof(). >> >> While the exisitng code works fine in most of the case, >> the logic is broken when using a 32bit perf on a 64bit kernel (Big Endian). >> When reading u64 using (u32 *)(&val)[0], perf (lib/find_*_bit()) assumes it gets >> lower 32bits of u64 which is wrong. Proposed fix is to swap the words >> of the u64 to handle this case. This is _not_ endianess swap. >> >> Suggested-by: Yury Norov >> Cc: Yury Norov >> Cc: Peter Zijlstra >> Cc: Ingo Molnar >> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo >> Cc: Alexander Shishkin >> Cc: Jiri Olsa >> Cc: Adrian Hunter >> Cc: Kan Liang >> Cc: Wang Nan >> Cc: Michael Ellerman >> Signed-off-by: Madhavan Srinivasan >> --- >> Changelog v3: >> 1)Moved the swap function to lib/bitmap.c >> 2)Added a macro for declaration >> 3)Added the comments >> >> Changelog v2: >> 1)Moved the swap code to a common function >> 2)Added more comments in the code >> >> Changelog v1: >> 1)updated commit message and patch subject >> 2)Add the fix to print_sample_iregs() in builtin-script.c >> >> tools/include/linux/bitmap.h | 5 +++++ >> tools/lib/bitmap.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >> tools/perf/builtin-script.c | 4 +++- >> tools/perf/util/session.c | 4 +++- >> 4 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/include/linux/bitmap.h b/tools/include/linux/bitmap.h >> index 28f5493da491..6be9a7ddcb03 100644 >> --- a/tools/include/linux/bitmap.h >> +++ b/tools/include/linux/bitmap.h >> @@ -2,14 +2,19 @@ >> #define _PERF_BITOPS_H >> >> #include >> +#include >> #include >> >> #define DECLARE_BITMAP(name,bits) \ >> unsigned long name[BITS_TO_LONGS(bits)] >> >> +#define DECLARE_U64_BITMAP(__name) \ >> + unsigned long __name[sizeof(u64)/sizeof(unsigned long)] >> + >> int __bitmap_weight(const unsigned long *bitmap, int bits); >> void __bitmap_or(unsigned long *dst, const unsigned long *bitmap1, >> const unsigned long *bitmap2, int bits); >> +void bitmap_from_u64(unsigned long *dst, u64 mask); >> >> #define BITMAP_FIRST_WORD_MASK(start) (~0UL << ((start) & (BITS_PER_LONG - 1))) >> >> diff --git a/tools/lib/bitmap.c b/tools/lib/bitmap.c >> index 0a1adc1111fd..464a0cc63e6a 100644 >> --- a/tools/lib/bitmap.c >> +++ b/tools/lib/bitmap.c >> @@ -29,3 +29,21 @@ void __bitmap_or(unsigned long *dst, const unsigned long *bitmap1, >> for (k = 0; k < nr; k++) >> dst[k] = bitmap1[k] | bitmap2[k]; >> } >> + >> +/* >> + * bitmap_from_u64 - Check and swap words within u64. >> + * @mask: source bitmap >> + * @dst: destination bitmap >> + * >> + * In 32 bit big endian userspace on a 64bit kernel, 'unsigned long' is 32 bits. >> + * When reading u64 using (u32 *)(&val)[0] and (u32 *)(&val)[1], >> + * we will get wrong value for the mask. That is "(u32 *)(&val)[0]" >> + * gets upper 32 bits of u64, but perf may expect lower 32bits of u64. >> + */ >> +void bitmap_from_u64(unsigned long *dst, u64 mask) >> +{ >> + dst[0] = mask & ULONG_MAX; >> + >> + if (sizeof(mask) > sizeof(unsigned long)) >> + dst[1] = mask >> 32; >> +} >> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c >> index e3ce2f34d3ad..1120ca117071 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c >> @@ -412,11 +412,13 @@ static void print_sample_iregs(struct perf_sample *sample, >> struct regs_dump *regs = &sample->intr_regs; >> uint64_t mask = attr->sample_regs_intr; >> unsigned i = 0, r; >> + DECLARE_U64_BITMAP(_mask); > I thought again, and realized that it may be just > DECLARE_BITMAP(_mask, 64); > > I think it's better than introduce new macro and I'd recommend you to > send v5 doing this. But this version is OK to me as well. So it's up > to you. Yeah. Make sense. My bad did not look close at DECLARE_BITMAP. Will send out a v5 now with that change. Maddy > > Reviewed-by: Yury Norov > >> if (!regs) >> return; >> >> - for_each_set_bit(r, (unsigned long *) &mask, sizeof(mask) * 8) { >> + bitmap_from_u64(_mask, mask); >> + for_each_set_bit(r, _mask, sizeof(mask) * 8) { >> u64 val = regs->regs[i++]; >> printf("%5s:0x%"PRIx64" ", perf_reg_name(r), val); >> } >> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/session.c b/tools/perf/util/session.c >> index 5214974e841a..fab1f9c1e0f5 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/util/session.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/session.c >> @@ -940,8 +940,10 @@ static void branch_stack__printf(struct perf_sample *sample) >> static void regs_dump__printf(u64 mask, u64 *regs) >> { >> unsigned rid, i = 0; >> + DECLARE_U64_BITMAP(_mask); >> >> - for_each_set_bit(rid, (unsigned long *) &mask, sizeof(mask) * 8) { >> + bitmap_from_u64(_mask, mask); >> + for_each_set_bit(rid, _mask, sizeof(mask) * 8) { >> u64 val = regs[i++]; >> >> printf(".... %-5s 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", >> -- >> 1.9.1