From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from stravinsky.debian.org (stravinsky.debian.org [82.195.75.108]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33C60241665; Tue, 24 Mar 2026 11:00:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=82.195.75.108 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774350058; cv=none; b=lw6Yx4YSIdBFUbPLckR8Jj85QC3wsEvzmGtJVtsW1B7FLMbSo03fzqCffwHwps6vB/aBc+7GMET0oTDrDun5IiLqv8M4rNBo44ws8wVwvxXBWs1hFh13kpEkEkviP9HV7L74xnxU1N5TeHllBqwM2kNl7V2SY3ESAX4TYG3LhZ4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774350058; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Oe3Vg3S8mxT/p5JmSF1aIUNvorHkMrnMplNiCvjDkH4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=i32AZnnJxLe/vw15k74jTkc5QfqXF/QkuCdNEDchwW9bBqnst3PfnwGkaDBnLF7BuSDRT90jKrC44U4DaalNRp2ojPHiDh1Jk5n8ZD6XtjQdFqV4WZ+DgzYBSZwvsgFLz816JeK9YP9zTr5qPC4euoisyEMDScfTWVYdEPre75c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=debian.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=debian.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=debian.org header.i=@debian.org header.b=as9Vd4Km; arc=none smtp.client-ip=82.195.75.108 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=debian.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=debian.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=debian.org header.i=@debian.org header.b="as9Vd4Km" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debian.org; s=smtpauto.stravinsky; h=X-Debian-User:In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=qbZ8j6xqh7ypw+ZPOVxuDTv3AEc31FwYpRu4/UHR7dM=; b=as9Vd4KmuiiFNY6u4zt9Wcqy2Z eDX/mlwY4qvo4guQ0tx8/OyXDQI0Tpo6/BARh0odFFMxMPZV7GUUqf2KaptTDF4UXWVSToAq+nJjz 4hLQ7C+APM+jrpAF17JQcfGN6M7fUzv2EGwdpshGtSPTggxLZnonbtXjjUVCkcqixFrkJSQvZViWV 1H8nVgIXDSP/kta2mIbzfdua2QThcs2yEX4FWRLCeN4T9sl6sEdfM2vYc42wW/GN2GLcrPMhb/S0d PFK0jReHCdKLhcbLI9gbEq3g6iNa5kJLviUAPLjiWBfL4BXcqCumMC7frHxmY5pL0OwIbgKZ7R1pe tg/Y46lA==; Received: from authenticated user by stravinsky.debian.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1w4zUy-008FwT-09; Tue, 24 Mar 2026 11:00:34 +0000 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 04:00:28 -0700 From: Breno Leitao To: Ian Rogers Cc: Leo Yan , acme@kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Namhyung Kim , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Adrian Hunter , James Clark , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, Denis Yaroshevskiy Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Fix crash on arm64 Message-ID: References: <20260205-perf_stat-v1-1-e433b0c918af@debian.org> <20260205173918.GB3529712@e132581.arm.com> <20260205175250.GC3529712@e132581.arm.com> <20260311115011.GJ4153946@e132581.arm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Debian-User: leitao On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 10:06:37AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 4:50 AM Leo Yan wrote: > > > > Hi Breno, > > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 03:21:00AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 10:22:27AM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote: > > > > I think it is a different issue, they have metrics while you don't. > > > > Your report does highlight we're missing a NO_JEVENTS=1 build-test, > > > > but the build is working for me. I'll send out two patches for these > > > > issues. > > > > > > Hi Ian, Leo, Acme > > > > > > I wanted to follow up on this. Are there any next steps I should take? > > > > Sorry for not tracking this issue. > > > > I can reproduce the issue on my Orion6 with setting a _dummy_ CPUID: > > > > $ export PERF_CPUID=0x00000000410fd490 > > $ perf stat -C 5 -vvv > > ... > > Aborted > > perf: util/evsel.c:2156: get_group_fd: Assertion `!(!leader->core.fd)' failed > > > > Because we are working on different hardwares, I am a bit suspect I > > reproduced the issue with difference sequence as yours. Anyway, I do > > see that an event can be opened prior to its leader event, see the log > > below. > > > > Thus, your patch seems make sense to me as we need to ensure the leader > > event to be opened first. Ian, how about you think? > > Because so many things depend on the event ordering, the patch makes > me very nervous, particularly how it will change architectural > requirement handling. Ordering the Intel slots and metric events is a > challenge. There is also how handling uncore events, which are > deliberately parsed out-of-order, will change. I've got a feeling the > test coverage for this isn't adequate, and finding the bugs requires > running on particular machines. It will also require examining the > default perf stat output to ensure this isn't broken; hopefully the > code is somewhat robust. Sure thing. please let me know if there is any action on my side, and I am happy to help. > Ideally, the impact of the change on all these issues would be in the > commit message, but it's more realistic to cover each issue with > testing. I'll try to ask an AI buddy to help with this. Could you > rebase and send a v2? I'm curious to see what sashiko will throw up. Ack. I will resping it, so, we can check what sashiko thinks about it. Thanks, --breno