| 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: <74ee84f8-e756-65d2-9ba4-b560f6e241bd@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 10:00:06 +0800
From: "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
kan.liang@...el.com, yao.jin@...el.com,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] perf report: Show branch type
On 4/12/2017 6:58 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 06:21:01AM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
>> 3. Use 2 bits in perf_branch_entry for a "cross" metrics checking
>> for branch cross 4K or 2M area. It's an approximate computing
>> for checking if the branch cross 4K page or 2MB page.
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> perf record -g --branch-filter any,save_type <command>
>>
>> perf report --stdio
>>
>> JCC forward: 27.7%
>> JCC backward: 9.8%
>> JMP: 0.0%
>> IND_JMP: 6.5%
>> CALL: 26.6%
>> IND_CALL: 0.0%
>> RET: 29.3%
>> IRET: 0.0%
>> CROSS_4K: 0.0%
>> CROSS_2M: 14.3%
> got mangled perf report --stdio output for:
>
>
> [root@...-x3650m4-02 perf]# ./perf record -j any,save_type kill
> kill: not enough arguments
> [ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> [ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.013 MB perf.data (18 samples) ]
>
> [root@...-x3650m4-02 perf]# ./perf report --stdio -f | head -30
> # To display the perf.data header info, please use --header/--header-only options.
> #
> #
> # Total Lost Samples: 0
> #
> # Samples: 253 of event 'cycles'
> # Event count (approx.): 253
> #
> # Overhead Command Source Shared Object Source Symbol Target Symbol Basic Block Cycles
> # ........ ....... .................... ....................................... ....................................... ..................
> #
> 8.30% perf
> Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __intel_pmu_enable_all.constprop.17 [k] native_write_msr -
> 7.91% perf
> Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] intel_pmu_lbr_enable_all [k] __intel_pmu_enable_all.constprop.17 -
> 7.91% perf
> Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] native_write_msr [k] intel_pmu_lbr_enable_all -
> 6.32% kill libc-2.24.so [.] _dl_addr [.] _dl_addr -
> 5.93% perf
> Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] perf_iterate_ctx [k] perf_iterate_ctx -
> 2.77% kill libc-2.24.so [.] malloc [.] malloc -
> 1.98% kill libc-2.24.so [.] _int_malloc [.] _int_malloc -
> 1.58% kill [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __rb_insert_augmented [k] __rb_insert_augmented -
> 1.58% perf
> Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] perf_event_exec [k] perf_event_exec -
> 1.19% kill [kernel.vmlinux] [k] anon_vma_interval_tree_insert [k] anon_vma_interval_tree_insert -
> 1.19% kill [kernel.vmlinux] [k] free_pgd_range [k] free_pgd_range -
> 1.19% kill [kernel.vmlinux] [k] n_tty_write [k] n_tty_write -
> 1.19% perf
> Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] native_sched_clock [k] sched_clock -
> ...
> SNIP
>
>
> jirka
Sorry, I look at this issue at midnight in Shanghai. I misunderstood
that the above output was only a mail format issue. Sorry about that.
Now I recheck the output, and yes, the perf report output is mangled.
But my patch doesn't touch the associated code.
Anyway I remove my patches, pull the latest update from perf/core branch
and run tests to check if its a regression issue. I test on HSW and SKL
both.
1. On HSW.
root@hsw:/tmp# perf record -j any kill
...... /* SNIP */
For more details see kill(1).
[ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.014 MB perf.data (9 samples) ]
root@hsw:/tmp# perf report --stdio
# To display the perf.data header info, please use
--header/--header-only options.
#
#
# Total Lost Samples: 0
#
# Samples: 144 of event 'cycles'
# Event count (approx.): 144
#
# Overhead Command Source Shared Object Source
Symbol Target Symbol Basic Block
Cycles
# ........ ....... ....................
............................... ...............................
..................
#
10.42% kill libc-2.23.so [.]
read_alias_file [.] read_alias_file -
9.72% kill [kernel.vmlinux] [k]
update_load_avg [k] update_load_avg -
9.03% perf
Um [unknown] [k] 0000000000000000 [k]
0000000000000000 -
8.33% kill libc-2.23.so [.]
_int_malloc [.] _int_malloc -
...... /* SNIP */
0.69% kill [kernel.vmlinux] [k]
_raw_spin_lock [k] unmap_page_range -
0.69% perf
Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __intel_pmu_enable_all [k]
native_write_msr -
0.69% perf
Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] intel_pmu_lbr_enable_all [k]
__intel_pmu_enable_all -
0.69% perf
Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] native_write_msr [k]
intel_pmu_lbr_enable_all -
The issue is still there.
2. On SKL
root@skl:/tmp# perf record -j any kill
...... /* SNIP */
For more details see kill(1).
[ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.012 MB perf.data (1 samples) ]
root@skl:/tmp# perf report --stdio
# To display the perf.data header info, please use
--header/--header-only options.
#
#
# Total Lost Samples: 0
#
# Samples: 32 of event 'cycles'
# Event count (approx.): 32
#
# Overhead Command Source Shared Object Source Symbol
Target Symbol Basic Block Cycles
# ........ ....... .................... ............................
............................ ..................
#
90.62% perf
Um [unknown] [k] 0000000000000000 [k]
0000000000000000 -
3.12% perf
Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __intel_pmu_enable_all [k]
native_write_msr 11
3.12% perf
Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] intel_pmu_lbr_enable_all [k]
__intel_pmu_enable_all 4
3.12% perf
Um [kernel.vmlinux] [k] native_write_msr [k]
intel_pmu_lbr_enable_all -
The issue is there too.
Now it works without my patch and it runs with latest perf/core branch.
So it looks like a regression issue.
Thanks
Jin Yao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists