From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Cc: 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>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@amd.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>,
Dmitrii Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>,
Changbin Du <changbin.du@huawei.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] perf evsel: evsel__group_pmu_name fixes
Date: Mon, 29 May 2023 19:03:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <780caf46-683a-3702-5478-d203c38189cb@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP-5=fXfJmBEuEa1ujYmoExWos-6PG4F=7XTaO6MouEQXLuE0Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 23/05/23 19:58, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 6:01 AM Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 23/05/23 07:44, Ian Rogers wrote:
>>> Previously the evsel__group_pmu_name would iterate the evsel's group,
>>> however, the list of evsels aren't yet sorted and so the loop may
>>> terminate prematurely. It is also not desirable to iterate the list of
>>> evsels during list_sort as the list may be broken. Precompute the
>>> group_pmu_name for the evsel before sorting, as part of the
>>> computation and only if necessary, iterate the whole list looking for
>>> group members so that being sorted isn't necessary.
>>>
>>> Move the group pmu name computation to parse-events.c given the closer
>>> dependency on the behavior of
>>> parse_events__sort_events_and_fix_groups.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 7abf0bccaaec ("perf evsel: Add function to compute group PMU name")
>>> Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
>>> ---
>>> tools/perf/util/evsel.c | 31 +++++-----------------
>>> tools/perf/util/evsel.h | 2 +-
>>> tools/perf/util/parse-events.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>> 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
>>> index 2f5910b31fa9..3247773f9e24 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
>>> @@ -290,6 +290,7 @@ void evsel__init(struct evsel *evsel,
>>> evsel->per_pkg_mask = NULL;
>>> evsel->collect_stat = false;
>>> evsel->pmu_name = NULL;
>>> + evsel->group_pmu_name = NULL;
>>> evsel->skippable = false;
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -431,6 +432,11 @@ struct evsel *evsel__clone(struct evsel *orig)
>>> if (evsel->pmu_name == NULL)
>>> goto out_err;
>>> }
>>> + if (orig->group_pmu_name) {
>>> + evsel->group_pmu_name = strdup(orig->group_pmu_name);
>>> + if (evsel->group_pmu_name == NULL)
>>> + goto out_err;
>>> + }
>>> if (orig->filter) {
>>> evsel->filter = strdup(orig->filter);
>>> if (evsel->filter == NULL)
>>> @@ -827,30 +833,6 @@ bool evsel__name_is(struct evsel *evsel, const char *name)
>>> return !strcmp(evsel__name(evsel), name);
>>> }
>>>
>>> -const char *evsel__group_pmu_name(const struct evsel *evsel)
>>> -{
>>> - struct evsel *leader = evsel__leader(evsel);
>>> - struct evsel *pos;
>>> -
>>> - /*
>>> - * Software events may be in a group with other uncore PMU events. Use
>>> - * the pmu_name of the first non-software event to avoid breaking the
>>> - * software event out of the group.
>>> - *
>>> - * Aux event leaders, like intel_pt, expect a group with events from
>>> - * other PMUs, so substitute the AUX event's PMU in this case.
>>> - */
>>> - if (evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE || evsel__is_aux_event(leader)) {
>>> - /* Starting with the leader, find the first event with a named PMU. */
>>> - for_each_group_evsel(pos, leader) {
>>> - if (pos->pmu_name)
>>> - return pos->pmu_name;
>>> - }
>>> - }
>>> -
>>> - return evsel->pmu_name ?: "cpu";
>>> -}
>>> -
>>> const char *evsel__metric_id(const struct evsel *evsel)
>>> {
>>> if (evsel->metric_id)
>>> @@ -1536,6 +1518,7 @@ void evsel__exit(struct evsel *evsel)
>>> zfree(&evsel->group_name);
>>> zfree(&evsel->name);
>>> zfree(&evsel->pmu_name);
>>> + zfree(&evsel->group_pmu_name);
>>> zfree(&evsel->unit);
>>> zfree(&evsel->metric_id);
>>> evsel__zero_per_pkg(evsel);
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evsel.h b/tools/perf/util/evsel.h
>>> index df8928745fc6..820771a649b2 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/evsel.h
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evsel.h
>>> @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ struct evsel {
>>> char *name;
>>> char *group_name;
>>> const char *pmu_name;
>>> + const char *group_pmu_name;
>>
>> Since it seems to be only used when sorting, do we really
>> need this on struct evsel?
>
> Agreed. There is also redundancy between evsel->pmu_name and
> evsel->pmu->name. For now having it here makes the coding easier and
> it could be a useful were we to do more with sorting, like sorting the
> final evlist rather than each evlist post parsing, or for debug
> output.
>
>>> #ifdef HAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT
>>> struct tep_event *tp_format;
>>> #endif
>>> @@ -289,7 +290,6 @@ int arch_evsel__hw_name(struct evsel *evsel, char *bf, size_t size);
>>> int __evsel__hw_cache_type_op_res_name(u8 type, u8 op, u8 result, char *bf, size_t size);
>>> const char *evsel__name(struct evsel *evsel);
>>> bool evsel__name_is(struct evsel *evsel, const char *name);
>>> -const char *evsel__group_pmu_name(const struct evsel *evsel);
>>> const char *evsel__metric_id(const struct evsel *evsel);
>>>
>>> static inline bool evsel__is_tool(const struct evsel *evsel)
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/parse-events.c b/tools/perf/util/parse-events.c
>>> index 34ba840ae19a..210e6f713c6f 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/parse-events.c
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/parse-events.c
>>> @@ -2125,6 +2125,41 @@ static int parse_events__with_hybrid_pmu(struct parse_events_state *parse_state,
>>> return ret;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static void evsel__compute_group_pmu_name(struct evsel *evsel,
>>> + const struct list_head *head)
>>> +{
>>> + struct evsel *leader = evsel__leader(evsel);
>>> + struct evsel *pos;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Software events may be in a group with other uncore PMU events. Use
>>> + * the pmu_name of the first non-software event to avoid breaking the
>>> + * software event out of the group.
>>> + *
>>> + * Aux event leaders, like intel_pt, expect a group with events from
>>> + * other PMUs, so substitute the AUX event's PMU in this case.
>>> + */
>>> + if (evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE || evsel__is_aux_event(leader)) {
>>> + /*
>>> + * Starting with the leader, find the first event with a named
>>> + * PMU. for_each_group_(member|evsel) isn't used as the list
>>> + * isn't yet sorted putting evsel's in the same group together.
>>> + */
>>> + if (leader->pmu_name) {
>>> + evsel->group_pmu_name = strdup(leader->pmu_name);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> + list_for_each_entry(pos, head, core.node) {
>>> + if (evsel__leader(pos) == leader && pos->pmu_name) {
>>> + evsel->group_pmu_name = strdup(pos->pmu_name);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + evsel->group_pmu_name = strdup(evsel->pmu_name ?: "cpu");
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> __weak int arch_evlist__cmp(const struct evsel *lhs, const struct evsel *rhs)
>>> {
>>> /* Order by insertion index. */
>>> @@ -2160,8 +2195,8 @@ static int evlist__cmp(void *state, const struct list_head *l, const struct list
>>>
>>> /* Group by PMU if there is a group. Groups can't span PMUs. */
>>> if (lhs_has_group && rhs_has_group) {
>>> - lhs_pmu_name = evsel__group_pmu_name(lhs);
>>> - rhs_pmu_name = evsel__group_pmu_name(rhs);
>>> + lhs_pmu_name = lhs->group_pmu_name;
>>> + rhs_pmu_name = rhs->group_pmu_name;
>>> ret = strcmp(lhs_pmu_name, rhs_pmu_name);
>>> if (ret)
>>> return ret;
>>> @@ -2186,6 +2221,8 @@ static bool parse_events__sort_events_and_fix_groups(struct list_head *list)
>>> list_for_each_entry(pos, list, core.node) {
>>> const struct evsel *pos_leader = evsel__leader(pos);
>>>
>>> + evsel__compute_group_pmu_name(pos, list);
>>
>> Perhaps check for failing to allocate the string?
>
> Will fix in v2.
>
>> But alternatively, allocate an array for pointers to the
>> group pmu names. Then they don't needed to be strdup'ed,
>> or stored on evsel. Would have to count the number of evsel
>> first though.
>>
>> group_pmu_names = calloc(nr_evsel, sizeof(const char *));
>>
>> group_pmu_names[pos->core.idx] = evsel__group_pmu_name(pos);
>
> Possibly, I'd prefer to keep it as simple as possible until we think
> we should optimize.
>
>>> +
>>> if (pos == pos_leader)
>>> orig_num_leaders++;
>>>
>>> @@ -2210,7 +2247,7 @@ static bool parse_events__sort_events_and_fix_groups(struct list_head *list)
>>> idx = 0;
>>> list_for_each_entry(pos, list, core.node) {
>>> const struct evsel *pos_leader = evsel__leader(pos);
>>> - const char *pos_pmu_name = evsel__group_pmu_name(pos);
>>> + const char *pos_pmu_name = pos->group_pmu_name;
>>> const char *cur_leader_pmu_name, *pos_leader_pmu_name;
>>> bool force_grouped = arch_evsel__must_be_in_group(pos);
>>>
>>> @@ -2227,7 +2264,7 @@ static bool parse_events__sort_events_and_fix_groups(struct list_head *list)
>>> if (!cur_leader)
>>> cur_leader = pos;
>>>
>>> - cur_leader_pmu_name = evsel__group_pmu_name(cur_leader);
>>> + cur_leader_pmu_name = cur_leader->group_pmu_name;
>>> if ((cur_leaders_grp != pos->core.leader && !force_grouped) ||
>>> strcmp(cur_leader_pmu_name, pos_pmu_name)) {
>>> /* Event is for a different group/PMU than last. */
>>> @@ -2239,7 +2276,7 @@ static bool parse_events__sort_events_and_fix_groups(struct list_head *list)
>>> */
>>> cur_leaders_grp = pos->core.leader;
>>> }
>>> - pos_leader_pmu_name = evsel__group_pmu_name(pos_leader);
>>> + pos_leader_pmu_name = pos_leader->group_pmu_name;
>>> if (strcmp(pos_leader_pmu_name, pos_pmu_name) || force_grouped) {
>>> /*
>>> * Event's PMU differs from its leader's. Groups can't
>>
>> By the way, do we really need unsorted_idx?
>
> Right, I've played around with this a bit. I'll have a go at
> explaining the motivation below.
>
>> For example what about this for evlist__cmp():
>>
>> static int evlist__cmp(void *state __maybe_unused, const struct list_head *l, const struct list_head *r)
>> {
>> const struct evsel *lhs = container_of(l, struct evsel, core.node);
>> const struct evsel *rhs = container_of(r, struct evsel, core.node);
>> int lhs_leader_idx = lhs->core.leader->idx;
>> int rhs_leader_idx = rhs->core.leader->idx;
>> int ret;
>>
>> if (lhs_leader_idx != rhs_leader_idx)
>> return lhs_leader_idx - rhs_leader_idx;
>
> So here any ungrouped evsels, or evsels in different groups will cause
> evlist__cmp to terminate.
>
>> ret = strcmp(evsel__group_pmu_name(lhs), evsel__group_pmu_name(rhs));
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>
> This is redundant as the leader matches on both lhs and rhs given the
> test above.
>
>> /* Architecture specific sorting. */
>> return arch_evlist__cmp(lhs, rhs);
>
> We'll never reach here for cases like ungrouped topdown (perf metric)
> events where we want to sort the topdown events to allow grouping. I
> think the comment:
>
> /*
> * First sort by grouping/leader. Read the leader idx only if the evsel
> * is part of a group, as -1 indicates no group.
> */
>
> isn't clear. I'll tweak it in v2, I think it would be better as something like:
>
> /*
> * First sort by grouping/leader. Read the leader idx only if the evsel
> * is part of a group, by default ungrouped events will be sorted relative
> * to grouped events based
> * on where the first ungrouped event occurs. If both events don't have
> * a group we want to fall-through to the arch specific sorting, that can
> * reorder and fix things like Intel's topdown events.
> */
>
> To go back to why the code became this way. By default we'll place
> metric's events into a weak group and if the perf_event_open fails
> we'll break the group. We're smart enough to know when breaking a
> group of events that the topdown event's group must not be broken.
> However, there are cases where the perf_event_open succeeds but then
> the counters yield "<not counted>" as they are part of a group. I've
> asked for kernel fixes to fail the perf_event_open, maybe they'll
> happen, for now I need to be able to work on old kernels anyway.
> Metrics with "<not counted>" events are now tagged as saying the
> events shouldn't be grouped but this has a problem of breaking the
> grouping for topdown events. We already had to sort events for cases
> like "{imc/cas_count_read/,imc/cas_count_write/}" where we have
> multiple imc PMUs and we need to group cas_count_read and
> cas_count_write events for each PMU - the eventual grouping looks like
> "{uncore_imc_0/cas_count_read/,uncore_imc_0/cas_count_write/},{uncore_imc_1/cas_count_read/,uncore_imc_1/cas_count_write/}...".
> The aim with the code was to have a single sorting mechanism for the
> existing uncore case and the new ungrouped topdown events case.
Are there any tests for that?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-29 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-23 4:44 [PATCH v1 1/2] perf evsel: evsel__group_pmu_name fixes Ian Rogers
2023-05-23 4:44 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] perf evsel: for_each_group fixes Ian Rogers
2023-05-23 14:31 ` Adrian Hunter
2023-05-23 17:04 ` Ian Rogers
2023-05-23 13:00 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] perf evsel: evsel__group_pmu_name fixes Adrian Hunter
2023-05-23 16:58 ` Ian Rogers
2023-05-29 16:03 ` Adrian Hunter [this message]
2023-05-29 16:16 ` Ian Rogers
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=780caf46-683a-3702-5478-d203c38189cb@intel.com \
--to=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=9erthalion6@gmail.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=changbin.du@huawei.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@arm.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sandipan.das@amd.com \
--cc=zhengjun.xing@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