| 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: <226626ec-4f96-d3f4-a6d5-62c17c897f32@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 00:12:21 +0800
From: "Wangnan (F)" <wangnan0@...wei.com>
To: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
"jolsa@...hat.com" <jolsa@...hat.com>,
"kernel-team@....com" <kernel-team@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf mmap: Fix perf backward recording
On 2017/11/1 21:57, Liang, Kan wrote:
>> On 2017/11/1 20:00, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 06:32:50PM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote:
>>>> On 2017/11/1 17:49, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 05:53:26AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote:
>>>>>> perf record backward recording doesn't work as we expected: it never
>>>>>> overwrite when ring buffer full.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Test:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Run a busy printing python task background like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> while True:
>>>>>> print 123
>>>>>>
>>>>>> send SIGUSR2 to perf to capture snapshot.)
>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> tools/perf/util/evlist.c | 8 +++++++-
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
>>>>>> index c6c891e..4c5daba 100644
>>>>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
>>>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
>>>>>> @@ -799,22 +799,28 @@ perf_evlist__should_poll(struct perf_evlist
>> *evlist __maybe_unused,
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> static int perf_evlist__mmap_per_evsel(struct perf_evlist *evlist, int
>> idx,
>>>>>> - struct mmap_params *mp, int cpu_idx,
>>>>>> + struct mmap_params *_mp, int cpu_idx,
>>>>>> int thread, int *_output, int
>> *_output_backward)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct perf_evsel *evsel;
>>>>>> int revent;
>>>>>> int evlist_cpu = cpu_map__cpu(evlist->cpus, cpu_idx);
>>>>>> + struct mmap_params *mp;
>>>>>> evlist__for_each_entry(evlist, evsel) {
>>>>>> struct perf_mmap *maps = evlist->mmap;
>>>>>> + struct mmap_params rdonly_mp;
>>>>>> int *output = _output;
>>>>>> int fd;
>>>>>> int cpu;
>>>>>> + mp = _mp;
>>>>>> if (evsel->attr.write_backward) {
>>>>>> output = _output_backward;
>>>>>> maps = evlist->backward_mmap;
>>>>>> + rdonly_mp = *_mp;
>>>>>> + rdonly_mp.prot &= ~PROT_WRITE;
>>>>>> + mp = &rdonly_mp;
>>>>>> if (!maps) {
>>>>>> maps = perf_evlist__alloc_mmap(evlist);
>>>>>> --
>>>>> What about this instead (not tested)?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
>>>>> index c6c891e154a6..27ebe355e794 100644
>>>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
>>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
>>>>> @@ -838,6 +838,11 @@ static int perf_evlist__mmap_per_evsel(struct
>> perf_evlist *evlist, int idx,
>>>>> if (*output == -1) {
>>>>> *output = fd;
>>>>> + if (evsel->attr.write_backward)
>>>>> + mp->prot = PROT_READ;
>>>>> + else
>>>>> + mp->prot = PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE;
>>>>> +
>>>> If evlist->overwrite is true, PROT_WRITE should be unset even if
>>>> write_backward is
>>>> not set. If you want to delay the setting of mp->prot, you need to consider
>>>> both evlist->overwrite and evsel->attr.write_backward.
>>> I thought evsel->attr.write_backward should be set when
>>> evlist->overwrite is set. Do you mean following case?
>>>
>>> perf record --overwrite -e 'cycles/no-overwrite/'
>>>
>> No. evlist->overwrite is unrelated to '--overwrite'. This is why I
>> said the concept of 'overwrite' and 'backward' is ambiguous.
>>
> Yes, I think we should make it clear.
>
> As we discussed previously, there are four possible combinations
> to access ring buffer , 'forward non-overwrite', 'forward overwrite',
> 'backward non-overwrite' and 'backward overwrite'.
>
> Actually, not all of the combinations are necessary.
> - 'forward overwrite' mode brings some problems which were mentioned
> in commit ID 9ecda41acb97 ("perf/core: Add ::write_backward attribute
> to perf event").
> - 'backward non-overwrite' mode is very similar as 'forward non-overwrite'.
> There is no extra advantage. Only keep one non-overwrite mode is enough.
> So 'forward non-overwrite' and 'backward overwrite' are enough for all perf tools.
>
> Furthermore, 'forward' and 'backward' only indicate the direction of the
> ring buffer. They don't impact the result and performance. It is not
> important as the concept of overwrite/non-overwrite.
>
> To simplify the concept, only 'non-overwrite' mode and 'overwrite' mode should
> be kept. 'non-overwrite' mode indicates the forward ring buffer. 'overwrite' mode
> indicates the backward ring buffer.
>
>> perf record never sets 'evlist->overwrite'. What '--overwrite' actually
>> does is setting write_backward. Some testcases needs overwrite evlist.
>>
> There are only four test cases which set overwrite, sw-clock,task-exit,
> mmap-basic, backward-ring-buffer.
> Only backward-ring-buffer is 'backward overwrite'.
> The rest three are all 'forward overwrite'. We just need to set write_backward
> to convert them to 'backward overwrite'.
> I think it's not hard to clean up.
If we add a new rule that overwrite ring buffers are always backward
then it is not hard to cleanup. However, the support of forward
overwrite ring buffer has a long history and the code is not written
by me. I'd like to check if there is some reason to keep support this
configuration?
Thank you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists