linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 07/18] perf: add generic memory sampling interface

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

Message-ID: <20130118230604.GJ4051@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:06:04 -0800
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	acme@...hat.com, jolsa@...hat.com, namhyung.kim@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 07/18] perf: add generic memory sampling interface

>  extern void perf_output_sample(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> index 7e24641..8283218 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -133,9 +133,9 @@ enum perf_event_sample_format {
>  	PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER			= 1U << 12,
>  	PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER			= 1U << 13,
>  	PERF_SAMPLE_WEIGHT			= 1U << 14,
> +	PERF_SAMPLE_DSRC			= 1U << 15,

This conflicts with similar extensions in the Haswell patchkit,
but that can be worked out by just moving some numbers (and making
sure the input/output calls are still in the right place)


> +union perf_mem_dsrc {
> +	__u64 val;
> +	struct {
> +		__u64   mem_op:5,	/* type of opcode */
> +			mem_lvl:14,	/* memory hierarchy level */
> +			mem_snoop:5,	/* snoop mode */
> +			mem_lock:2,	/* lock instr */
> +			mem_dtlb:7,	/* tlb access */
> +			mem_rsvd:31;
> +	};
> +};
> +
> +/* type of opcode (load/store/prefetch,code) */
> +#define PERF_MEM_OP_NA		0x01 /* not available */
> +#define PERF_MEM_OP_LOAD	0x02 /* load instruction */
> +#define PERF_MEM_OP_STORE	0x04 /* store instruction */
> +#define PERF_MEM_OP_PFETCH	0x08 /* prefetch */
> +#define PERF_MEM_OP_EXEC	0x10 /* code (execution) */
> +#define PERF_MEM_OP_SHIFT	0

Do we really need the shift? it's implicit in the bitfield right?

> +/* memory hierarchy (memory level, hit or miss) */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_NA		0x01  /* not available */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_HIT	0x02  /* hit level */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_MISS	0x04  /* miss level  */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_L1		0x08  /* L1 */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_LFB	0x10  /* Line Fill Buffer */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_L2		0x20  /* L2 hit */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_L3		0x40  /* L3 hit */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_LOC_RAM	0x80  /* Local DRAM */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_REM_RAM1	0x100 /* Remote DRAM (1 hop) */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_REM_RAM2	0x200 /* Remote DRAM (2 hops) */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_REM_CCE1	0x400 /* Remote Cache (1 hop) */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_REM_CCE2	0x800 /* Remote Cache (2 hops) */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_IO		0x1000 /* I/O memory */
> +#define PERF_MEM_LVL_UNC	0x2000 /* Uncached memory */

I would leave some free bits here, obviously this doesn't cover all
that may be possible in system architecture. Also why is this a bit mask, 
you can only hit one level right? So perhaps a number.

> +/* TLB access */
> +#define PERF_MEM_TLB_NA		0x01 /* not available */
> +#define PERF_MEM_TLB_HIT	0x02 /* hit level */
> +#define PERF_MEM_TLB_MISS	0x04 /* miss level */
> +#define PERF_MEM_TLB_L1		0x08 /* L1 */
> +#define PERF_MEM_TLB_L2		0x10 /* L2 */
> +#define PERF_MEM_TLB_WK		0x20 /* Hardware Walker*/
> +#define PERF_MEM_TLB_OS		0x40 /* OS fault handler */


Same


> +#define PERF_MEM_TLB_SHIFT	26
> +
> +#define PERF_MEM_S(a, s) \
> +	(((u64)PERF_MEM_##a##_##s) << PERF_MEM_##a##_SHIFT)

Is that used by anything?


-Andi
-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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/