From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: kan.liang@linux.intel.com
Cc: acme@kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
jolsa@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org,
vitaly.slobodskoy@intel.com, pavel.gerasimov@intel.com,
ak@linux.intel.com, eranian@google.com,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 01/13] perf/core: Add new branch sample type for LBR TOS
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 15:41:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191024134133.GC4114@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191022171136.4022-2-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:11:24AM -0700, kan.liang@linux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
>
> In LBR call stack mode, the depth of reconstructed LBR call stack limits
> to the number of LBR registers. With LBR Top-of-Stack (TOS) information,
> perf tool may stitch the stacks of two samples. The reconstructed LBR
> call stack can break the HW limitation.
>
> Add a new branch sample type to retrieve LBR TOS.
>
> Only when the new branch sample type is set, the TOS information is
> dumped into the PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK output.
> Perf tool should check the attr.branch_sample_type, and apply the
> corresponding format for PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK samples.
> Otherwise, some user case may be broken. For example, users may parse a
> perf.data, which include the new branch sample type, with an old version
> perf tool (without the check). Users probably get incorrect information
> without any warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 2 ++
> include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h | 10 +++++++++-
> kernel/events/core.c | 11 +++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index 61448c19a132..2b229ea1cc15 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ struct perf_raw_record {
> /*
> * branch stack layout:
> * nr: number of taken branches stored in entries[]
> + * tos: Top-of-Stack (TOS) information. PMU specific data.
> *
> * Note that nr can vary from sample to sample
> * branches (to, from) are stored from most recent
> @@ -100,6 +101,7 @@ struct perf_raw_record {
> */
> struct perf_branch_stack {
> __u64 nr;
> + __u64 tos; /* PMU specific data */
> struct perf_branch_entry entries[0];
> };
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> index bb7b271397a6..b1f022190571 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -180,6 +180,8 @@ enum perf_branch_sample_type_shift {
>
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_TYPE_SAVE_SHIFT = 16, /* save branch type */
>
> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_LBR_TOS_SHIFT = 17, /* save LBR TOS */
I think I prefer not having LBR here either, who knows what other
hardware can make use of that.
On that, you've completely failed to Cc the other architecture that
implement PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH.
Aside from that I can live with this version.
> +
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX_SHIFT /* non-ABI */
> };
>
> @@ -207,6 +209,8 @@ enum perf_branch_sample_type {
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_TYPE_SAVE =
> 1U << PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_TYPE_SAVE_SHIFT,
>
> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_LBR_TOS = 1U << PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_LBR_TOS_SHIFT,
> +
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX = 1U << PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX_SHIFT,
> };
>
> @@ -849,7 +853,11 @@ enum perf_event_type {
> * char data[size];}&& PERF_SAMPLE_RAW
> *
> * { u64 nr;
> - * { u64 from, to, flags } lbr[nr];} && PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK
> + * { u64 from, to, flags } lbr[nr];
> + *
> + * # only available if PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_LBR_TOS is set
> + * u64 tos;
> + * } && PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK
> *
> * { u64 abi; # enum perf_sample_regs_abi
> * u64 regs[weight(mask)]; } && PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 9ec0b0bfddbd..18b0a7d2c67e 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -6343,6 +6343,11 @@ static void perf_output_read(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
> perf_output_read_one(handle, event, enabled, running);
> }
>
> +static inline bool perf_sample_save_lbr_tos(struct perf_event *event)
> +{
> + return event->attr.branch_sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_LBR_TOS;
> +}
> +
> void perf_output_sample(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
> struct perf_event_header *header,
> struct perf_sample_data *data,
> @@ -6432,6 +6437,8 @@ void perf_output_sample(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
>
> perf_output_put(handle, data->br_stack->nr);
> perf_output_copy(handle, data->br_stack->entries, size);
> + if (perf_sample_save_lbr_tos(event))
> + perf_output_put(handle, data->br_stack->tos);
> } else {
> /*
> * we always store at least the value of nr
> @@ -6619,7 +6626,11 @@ void perf_prepare_sample(struct perf_event_header *header,
> if (data->br_stack) {
> size += data->br_stack->nr
> * sizeof(struct perf_branch_entry);
> +
> + if (perf_sample_save_lbr_tos(event))
> + size += sizeof(u64);
> }
> +
> header->size += size;
> }
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-24 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-22 17:11 [PATCH V3 00/13] Stitch LBR call stack kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 01/13] perf/core: Add new branch sample type for LBR TOS kan.liang
2019-10-24 13:41 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-10-24 15:50 ` Liang, Kan
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 02/13] perf/x86/intel: Output LBR TOS information kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 03/13] perf tools: Support new branch sample type for LBR TOS kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 04/13] perf header: Add check for event attr kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 05/13] perf pmu: Add support for PMU capabilities kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 06/13] perf header: Support CPU " kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 07/13] perf machine: Refine the function for LBR call stack reconstruction kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 08/13] perf tools: Stitch LBR call stack kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 09/13] perf report: Add option to enable the LBR stitching approach kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 10/13] perf script: " kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 11/13] perf top: " kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [PATCH V3 12/13] perf c2c: " kan.liang
2019-10-22 17:11 ` [RFC PATCH V3 13/13] perf hist: Add fast path for duplicate entries check kan.liang
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=20191024134133.GC4114@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=pavel.gerasimov@intel.com \
--cc=vitaly.slobodskoy@intel.com \
/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