public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Alexandre Truong <alexandre.truong@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
	John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
	Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huawei.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
	Jin Yao <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Al Grant <al.grant@arm.com>, James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>,
	Wilco Dijkstra <wilco.dijkstra@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf tools: determine if LR is the return address
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 01:05:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210124000526.GE138414@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210122161854.5289-4-alexandre.truong@arm.com>

On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 04:18:54PM +0000, Alexandre Truong wrote:
> On arm64 and frame pointer mode (e.g: perf record --callgraph fp),
> use dwarf unwind info to check if the link register is the return
> address in order to inject it to the frame pointer stack.
> 
> Write the following application:
> 
> 	int a = 10;
> 
> 	void f2(void)
> 	{
> 		for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
> 			a *= a;
> 	}
> 
> 	void f1()
> 	{
> 		f2();
> 	}
> 
> 	int main (void)
> 	{
> 		f1();
> 		return 0;
> 	}
> 
> with the following compilation flags:
> 	gcc -g -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fno-inline -O1
> 
> The compiler omits the frame pointer for f2 on arm. This is a problem
> with any leaf call, for example an application with many different
> calls to malloc() would always omit the calling frame, even if it
> can be determined.
> 
> 	./perf record --call-graph fp ./a.out
> 	./perf report
> 
> currently gives the following stack:
> 
> 0xffffea52f361
> _start
> __libc_start_main
> main
> f2

reproduced on x86 as well

> +static bool get_leaf_frame_caller_enabled(struct perf_sample *sample)
> +{
> +	return callchain_param.record_mode != CALLCHAIN_FP || !sample->user_regs.regs
> +		|| sample->user_regs.mask != PERF_REGS_MASK;
> +}
> +
> +static int add_entry(struct unwind_entry *entry, void *arg)
> +{
> +	struct entries *entries = arg;
> +
> +	entries->stack[entries->i++] = entry->ip;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +u64 get_leaf_frame_caller_aarch64(struct perf_sample *sample, struct thread *thread)
> +{
> +	u64 leaf_frame;
> +	struct entries entries = {{0, 0}, 0};
> +
> +	if (get_leaf_frame_caller_enabled(sample))

the name suggest you'd want to continue if it's true

> +		return 0;
> +
> +	unwind__get_entries(add_entry, &entries, thread, sample, 2);

I'm scratching my head how this unwinds anything, you enabled just
registers, not the stack right? so the unwind code would do just
IP -> LR + 1 shift?

thanks,
jirka

> +	leaf_frame = callchain_param.order == ORDER_CALLER ?
> +		entries.stack[0] : entries.stack[1];
> +
> +	if (leaf_frame + 1 == sample->user_regs.regs[PERF_REG_ARM64_LR])
> +		return sample->user_regs.regs[PERF_REG_ARM64_LR];
> +	return 0;
> +}

SNIP


  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-24  0:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-22 16:18 [PATCH 1/4] perf tools: record aarch64 registers automatically Alexandre Truong
2021-01-22 16:18 ` [PATCH 2/4] perf tools: add a mechanism to inject stack frames Alexandre Truong
2021-01-22 16:18 ` [PATCH 3/4] perf tools: enable dwarf_callchain_users on arm64 Alexandre Truong
2021-01-22 16:18 ` [PATCH 4/4] perf tools: determine if LR is the return address Alexandre Truong
2021-01-24  0:05   ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2021-01-25  9:39     ` James Clark
2021-02-08 15:39   ` James Clark
2021-02-10 12:05     ` Alexandre Truong

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=20210124000526.GE138414@krava \
    --to=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=al.grant@arm.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alexandre.truong@arm.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=james.clark@arm.com \
    --cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
    --cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=leo.yan@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=shikemeng@huawei.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=wilco.dijkstra@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yao.jin@linux.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