| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CABPqkBQ+YMRvR6mv7NrW4-MZOgW6ztntJV5RMehr+SB9ymkYLw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 14:21:43 +0200
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To: "Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 6/7] perf, x86: Use LBR call stack to get user callchain
But still, if I do:
$ perf record -g -e cpu/cycles/k ........
Looks like your code will activate LBR cstack for user stack even
though I don't use it.
I know it won't generate any user samples (theoretically) but you are
still commandeering
the LBR resource which other events may want to use.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Yan, Zheng <zheng.z.yan@...el.com> wrote:
>> On 10/24/2012 07:47 PM, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Yan, Zheng <zheng.z.yan@...el.com> wrote:
>>>> On 10/24/2012 04:57 PM, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Yan, Zheng <zheng.z.yan@...el.com> wrote:
>>>>>> From: "Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Try enabling the LBR call stack feature if event request recording
>>>>>> callchain. Try utilizing the LBR call stack to get user callchain
>>>>>> in case of there is no frame pointer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yan, Zheng <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c | 126 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h | 7 ++
>>>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c | 20 ++---
>>>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c | 3 +
>>>>>> include/linux/perf_event.h | 6 ++
>>>>>> kernel/events/core.c | 11 ++-
>>>>>> 6 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
>>>>>> index 8ae8044..3bf2100 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
>>>>>> @@ -398,35 +398,46 @@ int x86_pmu_hw_config(struct perf_event *event)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if (event->attr.precise_ip > precise)
>>>>>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>>>> - /*
>>>>>> - * check that PEBS LBR correction does not conflict with
>>>>>> - * whatever the user is asking with attr->branch_sample_type
>>>>>> - */
>>>>>> - if (event->attr.precise_ip > 1 && x86_pmu.intel_cap.pebs_format < 2) {
>>>>>> - u64 *br_type = &event->attr.branch_sample_type;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - if (has_branch_stack(event)) {
>>>>>> - if (!precise_br_compat(event))
>>>>>> - return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - /* branch_sample_type is compatible */
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - } else {
>>>>>> - /*
>>>>>> - * user did not specify branch_sample_type
>>>>>> - *
>>>>>> - * For PEBS fixups, we capture all
>>>>>> - * the branches at the priv level of the
>>>>>> - * event.
>>>>>> - */
>>>>>> - *br_type = PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - if (!event->attr.exclude_user)
>>>>>> - *br_type |= PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_USER;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - if (!event->attr.exclude_kernel)
>>>>>> - *br_type |= PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_KERNEL;
>>>>>> - }
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * check that PEBS LBR correction does not conflict with
>>>>>> + * whatever the user is asking with attr->branch_sample_type
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + if (event->attr.precise_ip > 1 && x86_pmu.intel_cap.pebs_format < 2) {
>>>>>> + u64 *br_type = &event->attr.branch_sample_type;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (has_branch_stack(event)) {
>>>>>> + if (!precise_br_compat(event))
>>>>>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* branch_sample_type is compatible */
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * user did not specify branch_sample_type
>>>>>> + *
>>>>>> + * For PEBS fixups, we capture all
>>>>>> + * the branches at the priv level of the
>>>>>> + * event.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + *br_type = PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!event->attr.exclude_user)
>>>>>> + *br_type |= PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_USER;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!event->attr.exclude_kernel)
>>>>>> + *br_type |= PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_KERNEL;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + } else if (event->attr.sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN) {
>>>>>> + if (!has_branch_stack(event) && x86_pmu.attr_lbr_callstack) {
>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>> + * user did not specify branch_sample_type,
>>>>>> + * try using the LBR call stack facility to
>>>>>> + * record call chains in the user space.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + event->attr.branch_sample_type =
>>>>>> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_USER |
>>>>>> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_CALL_STACK;
>>>>>
>>>>> You are forcing user level here, but how do you know the user wanted
>>>>> ONLY user level
>>>>> callchains?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The LBR call stack is used only when the frame pointer approach doesn't work.
>>>
>>> And where is that determination made?
>>
>> check code that is added to perf_callchain_user and perf_callchain_user32
>>
> Are you saying you can run in a mode where you get kernel call stack via
> frame-pointer and the user call stack via LBR cstack for a single event?
>
>
>>>
>>>> I think the kernel has frame pointer for the most cases. The second reason is
>>>> that the LBR call stack only has 16 entries. I think it's too small to record
>>>> both kernel and user call chains.
>>>>
>>> It's even too small for many object oriented user programs as well.
>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Yan, Zheng
>>>>
>>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists