linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: Add a new sort order: SORT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1332877098.16159.260.camel@twins>
Date:	Tue, 27 Mar 2012 21:38:18 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
	Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Add a new sort order: SORT_INCLUSIVE (v4)

On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 11:09 -0700, Arun Sharma wrote:
> On 3/24/12 7:14 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 
> >> The other problem in branch stacks/LBR is that they're
> >> sampled branches. Just because I got a sample with:
> >>
> >> a ->  b
> >> b ->  c
> >>
> >> doesn't necessarily mean that the callchain was a ->  b ->  c.
> >
> > Not sure what you mean. If you have a ->  b, b ->  c in single
> > LBR sample it means you got a ->  b ->  c.
> >
> 
> I was going by Stephane's commit message here:
> 
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1236999
> 
>  > Statistical sampling of taken branch should not be confused
>  > for branch tracing. Not all branches are necessarily captured
> 
> Stephane, could you please explain if the 16 filtered branches in LBR 
> are guaranteed to be from a given callchain to the leaf function? My 
> understanding is that it's not.
> 
> callchain1: a -> b -> d -> e (sample a->b)
> callchain2: a -> c -> b -> f (sample b->f)
> 
> on PMU interrupt can we end up with:
> 
> b -> f <- top of stack
> a -> b
> ...
> 
> even though a -> b -> f can never happen in the actual program flow?

Right, so the LBR is a queue not a stack. A program like:

foo() {
	bar1();
	bar2();
}

will, using the lbr, look like: foo->bar1->bar2 (if you filter returns),
or foo->bar1->foo+x->bar2 if you include returns.

A callchain is a pure stack, a return pops the top most entry, the above
program can only give 3 possible callchains:

a) foo
b) foo, bar1
c) foo, bar2

Furthermore, the LBR is about any branch, callchains are about function
calls.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/