From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752102AbbIHB42 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Sep 2015 21:56:28 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.220.51]:35207 "EHLO mail-pa0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751197AbbIHB40 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Sep 2015 21:56:26 -0400 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:53:11 +0900 From: Namhyung Kim To: "Wangnan (F)" Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Jiri Olsa , LKML , Masami Hiramatsu , pi3orama@163.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] perf probe: Split add_perf_probe_events() Message-ID: <20150908015311.GA1911@danjae> References: <1441368963-11565-1-git-send-email-namhyung@kernel.org> <55EBEF99.8010506@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55EBEF99.8010506@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23+102 (2ca89bed6448) (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 03:47:37PM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote: > Hi Namhyung, Hi, I'm off until Wednesday. I'll be able to take a look at it on Thursday. Thanks, Namhyung > > Thanks for this patchset. > > Could you plase have a look at patch 5/27 and 6/27 in my newest pull > request? > These 2 patches utilize new probing API to create probe point and collect > probe_trace_events. I'm not very sure I fully understand your design > principle, > especially the cleanup part, because I can see different functions dealing > with > cleanup: > > cleanup_perf_probe_events > del_perf_probe_events > clear_perf_probe_event > clear_probe_trace_event > > But non of them works perfectly for me. > > In bpf_prog_priv__clear() function of 6/27, I copied some code from > cleanup_perf_probe_events(), because I think when destroying bpf programs, > the probe_trace_events should also be cleanuped, but we don't need call > exit_symbol_maps() many times, because we are in 'perf record', and not > sure whether other parts of perf need symbol maps. Otherwise I think > directly > calling cleanup_perf_probe_events() sould be better. > > You can find patch from: > > http://lkml.kernel.org/n/1441523623-152703-6-git-send-email-wangnan0@huawei.com > > http://lkml.kernel.org/n/1441523623-152703-7-git-send-email-wangnan0@huawei.com > > Thank you. > > On 2015/9/4 20:15, Namhyung Kim wrote: > >The add_perf_probe_events() does 3 things: > > > > 1. convert all perf events to trace events > > 2. add all trace events to kernel > > 3. cleanup all trace events > > > >But sometimes we need to do something with the trace events. So split > >the funtion into three, so that it can access intermediate trace events > >via struct __event_package if needed. > > > >Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu > >Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim > >--- > > tools/perf/util/probe-event.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c b/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c > >index eb5f18b75402..2c762f41e7a5 100644 > >--- a/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c > >+++ b/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c > >@@ -2765,9 +2765,10 @@ struct __event_package { > > int ntevs; > > }; > >-int add_perf_probe_events(struct perf_probe_event *pevs, int npevs) > >+static int convert_perf_probe_events(struct perf_probe_event *pevs, int npevs, > >+ struct __event_package **ppkgs) > > { > >- int i, j, ret; > >+ int i, ret; > > struct __event_package *pkgs; > > ret = 0; > >@@ -2792,12 +2793,21 @@ int add_perf_probe_events(struct perf_probe_event *pevs, int npevs) > > ret = convert_to_probe_trace_events(pkgs[i].pev, > > &pkgs[i].tevs); > > if (ret < 0) > >- goto end; > >+ return ret; > > pkgs[i].ntevs = ret; > > } > > /* This just release blacklist only if allocated */ > > kprobe_blacklist__release(); > >+ *ppkgs = pkgs; > >+ > >+ return 0; > >+} > >+ > >+static int apply_perf_probe_events(struct __event_package *pkgs, int npevs) > >+{ > >+ int i, ret = 0; > >+ > > /* Loop 2: add all events */ > > for (i = 0; i < npevs; i++) { > > ret = __add_probe_trace_events(pkgs[i].pev, pkgs[i].tevs, > >@@ -2806,7 +2816,16 @@ int add_perf_probe_events(struct perf_probe_event *pevs, int npevs) > > if (ret < 0) > > break; > > } > >-end: > >+ return ret; > >+} > >+ > >+static void cleanup_perf_probe_events(struct __event_package *pkgs, int npevs) > >+{ > >+ int i, j; > >+ > >+ if (pkgs == NULL) > >+ return; > >+ > > /* Loop 3: cleanup and free trace events */ > > for (i = 0; i < npevs; i++) { > > for (j = 0; j < pkgs[i].ntevs; j++) > >@@ -2815,6 +2834,18 @@ end: > > } > > free(pkgs); > > exit_symbol_maps(); > >+} > >+ > >+int add_perf_probe_events(struct perf_probe_event *pevs, int npevs) > >+{ > >+ int ret; > >+ struct __event_package *pkgs = NULL; > >+ > >+ ret = convert_perf_probe_events(pevs, npevs, &pkgs); > >+ if (ret == 0) > >+ ret = apply_perf_probe_events(pkgs, npevs); > >+ > >+ cleanup_perf_probe_events(pkgs, npevs); > > return ret; > > } > >