From patchwork Tue Mar 17 21:32:47 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo X-Patchwork-Id: 11444167 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578A992A for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:34:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34D152076D for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:34:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="MILoB+a6"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="fBYocXCE" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 34D152076D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+patchwork-linux-arm=patchwork.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To: Message-Id:Date:Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=HYMPyHVgGtcqwcQT1NjwXNJv4ohefJcWjiVH9daFzfg=; b=MILoB+a6vMBT6D 2r6Dlu25tM6XWwL7NVmm2rhCFbwzNF5/Hh4deIUUMLZUJgQVELmyl2yrS27IW/4XhZnZkPczeeeGi sHv1W2FFHXKJmZUsc9jWtVg4RUFtAAuT2whPmgQ/UHgtO03vxZjXK0dONswE9gbhW6OyLh3bou49o 71lRpZTBwlZ7HShkXTX6cNX4mFeSceH0H1vZ2t5wRpBWBv3gXI8uNI53Me9ictOKqemQ/WmMF7xFh VvWjMybqhyEQa9MBxpbZkMANnbSqA32n9kYc18WfbDOLHe9DI840uhlnS9PmhRfaShdiGjVSElmna a7HhmX6R6gCXVHnkCKug==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jEJqo-0002ET-B6; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:34:14 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jEJqQ-0001sz-O1 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:33:52 +0000 Received: from quaco.ghostprotocols.net (unknown [179.97.37.151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DE4220738; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:33:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1584480830; bh=hiEEWucSxZxjI7MT3kScKEk8sa1lujh7WLXD8EchpZw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=fBYocXCEwwqccsdzV3YH2rqg/ciDhtMBGv8UjHXp2CYlXewHsKX7k9Dv3X5q0bCdE y7BlBY/8qLPV1BoGJNq8Jj5Rs3KjmKrsZZnco6aS7is/6Czr9LF3OZj7IDJoz8/Swp eY7rJt5v2CGJxpjp3GtQrvdz9Co9EHEetCuzCabQ= From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner Subject: [PATCH 11/23] perf cs-etm: Correct synthesizing instruction samples Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:32:47 -0300 Message-Id: <20200317213259.15494-12-acme@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.21.1 In-Reply-To: <20200317213259.15494-1-acme@kernel.org> References: <20200317213259.15494-1-acme@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200317_143350_835361_AEDC5EDF X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 19.66 ) X-Spam-Score: -5.2 (-----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.4.3 on bombadil.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (-5.2 points) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -5.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, high trust [198.145.29.99 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID_EF Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature -0.0 DKIMWL_WL_HIGH DKIMwl.org - Whitelisted High sender X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Mathieu Poirier , Suzuki Poulouse , Clark Williams , coresight ml , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Shishkin , Peter Zijlstra , Jiri Olsa , Leo Yan , Namhyung Kim , Robert Walker , Jiri Olsa , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Mike Leach Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+patchwork-linux-arm=patchwork.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org From: Leo Yan When 'etm->instructions_sample_period' is less than 'tidq->period_instructions', the function cs_etm__sample() cannot handle this case properly with its logic. Let's see below flow as an example: - If we set itrace option '--itrace=i4', then function cs_etm__sample() has variables with initialized values: tidq->period_instructions = 0 etm->instructions_sample_period = 4 - When the first packet is coming: packet->instr_count = 10; the number of instructions executed in this packet is 10, thus update period_instructions as below: tidq->period_instructions = 0 + 10 = 10 instrs_over = 10 - 4 = 6 offset = 10 - 6 - 1 = 3 tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over = 6 - When the second packet is coming: packet->instr_count = 10; in the second pass, assume 10 instructions in the trace sample again: tidq->period_instructions = 6 + 10 = 16 instrs_over = 16 - 4 = 12 offset = 10 - 12 - 1 = -3 -> the negative value tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over = 12 So after handle these two packets, there have below issues: The first issue is that cs_etm__instr_addr() returns the address within the current trace sample of the instruction related to offset, so the offset is supposed to be always unsigned value. But in fact, function cs_etm__sample() might calculate a negative offset value (in handling the second packet, the offset is -3) and pass to cs_etm__instr_addr() with u64 type with a big positive integer. The second issue is it only synthesizes 2 samples for sample period = 4. In theory, every packet has 10 instructions so the two packets have total 20 instructions, 20 instructions should generate 5 samples (4 x 5 = 20). This is because cs_etm__sample() only calls once cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample() to generate instruction sample per range packet. This patch fixes the logic in function cs_etm__sample(); the basic idea for handling coming packet is: - To synthesize the first instruction sample, it combines the left instructions from the previous packet and the head of the new packet; then generate continuous samples with sample period; - At the tail of the new packet, if it has the rest instructions, these instructions will be left for the sequential sample. Suggested-by: Mike Leach Signed-off-by: Leo Yan Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier Reviewed-by: Mike Leach Cc: Alexander Shishkin Cc: Jiri Olsa Cc: Mark Rutland Cc: Namhyung Kim Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Robert Walker Cc: Suzuki Poulouse Cc: coresight ml Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Link: http://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200219021811.20067-4-leo.yan@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo --- tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c b/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c index 2c4156c5ed09..1ddcc67e13dd 100644 --- a/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c +++ b/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c @@ -1358,9 +1358,12 @@ static int cs_etm__sample(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq, struct cs_etm_auxtrace *etm = etmq->etm; int ret; u8 trace_chan_id = tidq->trace_chan_id; - u64 instrs_executed = tidq->packet->instr_count; + u64 instrs_prev; - tidq->period_instructions += instrs_executed; + /* Get instructions remainder from previous packet */ + instrs_prev = tidq->period_instructions; + + tidq->period_instructions += tidq->packet->instr_count; /* * Record a branch when the last instruction in @@ -1378,26 +1381,76 @@ static int cs_etm__sample(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq, * TODO: allow period to be defined in cycles and clock time */ - /* Get number of instructions executed after the sample point */ - u64 instrs_over = tidq->period_instructions - - etm->instructions_sample_period; + /* + * Below diagram demonstrates the instruction samples + * generation flows: + * + * Instrs Instrs Instrs Instrs + * Sample(n) Sample(n+1) Sample(n+2) Sample(n+3) + * | | | | + * V V V V + * -------------------------------------------------- + * ^ ^ + * | | + * Period Period + * instructions(Pi) instructions(Pi') + * + * | | + * \---------------- -----------------/ + * V + * tidq->packet->instr_count + * + * Instrs Sample(n...) are the synthesised samples occurring + * every etm->instructions_sample_period instructions - as + * defined on the perf command line. Sample(n) is being the + * last sample before the current etm packet, n+1 to n+3 + * samples are generated from the current etm packet. + * + * tidq->packet->instr_count represents the number of + * instructions in the current etm packet. + * + * Period instructions (Pi) contains the the number of + * instructions executed after the sample point(n) from the + * previous etm packet. This will always be less than + * etm->instructions_sample_period. + * + * When generate new samples, it combines with two parts + * instructions, one is the tail of the old packet and another + * is the head of the new coming packet, to generate + * sample(n+1); sample(n+2) and sample(n+3) consume the + * instructions with sample period. After sample(n+3), the rest + * instructions will be used by later packet and it is assigned + * to tidq->period_instructions for next round calculation. + */ /* - * Calculate the address of the sampled instruction (-1 as - * sample is reported as though instruction has just been - * executed, but PC has not advanced to next instruction) + * Get the initial offset into the current packet instructions; + * entry conditions ensure that instrs_prev is less than + * etm->instructions_sample_period. */ - u64 offset = (instrs_executed - instrs_over - 1); - u64 addr = cs_etm__instr_addr(etmq, trace_chan_id, - tidq->packet, offset); + u64 offset = etm->instructions_sample_period - instrs_prev; + u64 addr; - ret = cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample( - etmq, tidq, addr, etm->instructions_sample_period); - if (ret) - return ret; + while (tidq->period_instructions >= + etm->instructions_sample_period) { + /* + * Calculate the address of the sampled instruction (-1 + * as sample is reported as though instruction has just + * been executed, but PC has not advanced to next + * instruction) + */ + addr = cs_etm__instr_addr(etmq, trace_chan_id, + tidq->packet, offset - 1); + ret = cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample( + etmq, tidq, addr, + etm->instructions_sample_period); + if (ret) + return ret; - /* Carry remaining instructions into next sample period */ - tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over; + offset += etm->instructions_sample_period; + tidq->period_instructions -= + etm->instructions_sample_period; + } } if (etm->sample_branches) {