Message-ID: <CANLsYkyW2oH=6TjPRoDyAqtHKVQbAYesNA5O5QmLBSnjCie8dw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 Jan 2018 14:11:00 -0700
From:   Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To:     Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@....com>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        namhyung@...nel.org, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@....com>, suzuki.poulosi@....com,
        "Jeremiassen, Tor" <tor@...com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] perf tools: Add support for CoreSight trace decoding

On 11 January 2018 at 10:28, Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@....com> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 08:45:21 -0700
> Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11 January 2018 at 05:23, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 06:08:21PM -0600, Kim Phillips wrote:
>> >> Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> > Instructions on how to build and install the openCSD library are provided
>> >> > in the HOWTO.md of the project repository.
>> >
>> >> Usually when a perf builder sees something they need "on," they - or,
>> >> at least I - start querying the host's package manager for something
>> >> that provides it (e.g., apt search/install libopencsd), but since no
>> >> distro provides libopencsd, this is bad because it misleads the user.
>> >
>> > It's on the radar to push this at distros fairly soon.
>
> Adding packages to distros takes years, this patchset is being
> submitted for inclusion *now*.  So until then, it would greatly
> facilitate users if the relevant libopencsd source files were
> self-contained within perf from the get go.

I do not agree with you on the front that it takes years.  On the flip
side it would take a significant amount of time and effort to refactor
the openCSD library so that it can be added to the kernel tree.  This
patchset is available now with a solution that follows what has
already been done for dozens of other external library.  There is no
point in delaying the inclusion of the functionality when an
end-to-end solution exists.

>
>> >  Part of the
>> > discussion was wanting to get things to the point where the tools using
>> > the library were far enough along that we could be reasonably sure that
>
> Curious, what other tools are there?

Ask around at ARM.

>
>> > there weren't any problems that were going to require ABI breaks to fix
>> > before pushing the library at distros since ABI churn isn't nice for
>> > packagers to deal with.
>
> Why make perf the guinea pig?  Whatever, this doesn't preclude
> adding the code into the tree; it can be removed years from now when
> libopencsd becomes ubiquitous among distros.

The same can be said about proceeding the other way around - the
openCSD library can be added to the kernel tree later if it is deemed
necessary.  Until then I really don't see why we'd prevent people from
accessing the functionality.

>
>> > There's also a bit of a chicken and egg problem
>> > in that it's a lot easier to get distros to package libraries that have
>> > users available (some are not really bothered about this of course but
>> > it still helps).
>>
>> Moreover including in the kernel tree every library that can
>> potentially be used by the perf tools simply doesn't scale.
>
> This is a trace decoder library we're talking about:  there are no
> others in perf's system features autodetection list.  And why wouldn't
> adding such libraries scale?

I don't see why a decoder library and say, libelf, need to be treated
differently.

>
>>  The perf
>> tools project has come up with a very cleaver way to deal with
>> external dependencies and I don't see why the OpenCSD library should
>> be different.
>
> Again, the opencsd library is a decoder library:  this patchseries adds
> it as a package dependency (when it isn't even a package in any
> distro), and it's different in that it's the first decoder library to
> be submitted as an external dependency (i.e., not fully built-in, like
> Intel's, or even the Arm SPE's pending submission).

I don't see why we absolutely need to do exactly the same as Intel.
The library is public and this patchset neatly integrates it with the
perf tools.

>
>> >> Keeping the library external will also inevitably introduce more
>> >> source level synchronization problems because the perf sources being
>> >> built may not be compatible with their version of the library, whether
>> >> due to new features like new trace hardware support, or API changes.
>> >
>> > Perf users installing from source rather than from a package (who do
>> > tend to the more technical side even for kernel developers) already have
>> > to cope with potentially installing at least dwarf, gtk2, libaudit,
>> > libbfd, libelf, libnuma, libperl, libpython, libslang, libcrypto,
>> > libunwind, libdw-dwarf-unwind, zlib, lzma, bpf and OpenJDK depending on
>> > which features they want.  I'm not sure that adding one more library is
>> > going to be the end of the world here, especially once the packaging
>> > starts to filter through distros.  Until that happens at least people
>> > are no worse off for not having the feature.
>>
>> I completely agree.  Just like any other package, people that want the
>> very latest code need to install from source.
>
> A fully-integrated solution would work better for people, e.g., how are
> people supposed to know what 'latest' is when there are separate,
> unsynchronized git repos?

The same applies to any of the other libraries perf is working with.

>
>> >> As Mark Brown (cc'd) mentioned on the Coresight mailing list, this may
>> >> be able to be done the same way the dtc is incorporated into the
>> >> kernel, where only its relevant sources are included and updated as
>> >> needed:  see linux/scripts/dtc/update-dtc-source.sh.
>> >
>> > Bear in mind that we need dtc for essentially all kernel development on
>> > ARM and when it was introduced it was a new requirement for existing
>> > systems, it's a bit of a different case here where it's an optional
>> > feature in an optional tool.
>
> That argument applies to Intel-PT, yet its decoder is self-contained
> within perf: all non-x86 perf binaries are capable of decoding PT.
> We'd want that for Arm Coresight where perf gets statically built to
> run on much more constrained systems like Android.

Traces can't be decoded properly without the support of external
libraries, whether we are talking about PT or CS.

>
> Or are you referring to the higher level linux/scripts/ location of the
> dtc?  That's not my point: the libopencsd sources can live under
> somewhere like linux/tools/.
>
> Kim

Powered by blists - more mailing lists