linux-kernel - Re: perf record doesn't work on rtd129x SoC

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: <1b2d2bc3-afcf-02c3-ccd6-e2a227c23fd3@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Dec 2019 11:20:14 +0000
From:   Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To:     Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
        Wang YanQing <udknight@...il.com>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        linux-realtek-soc@...ts.infradead.org,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: perf record doesn't work on rtd129x SoC

On 2019-12-04 7:28 am, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Hi YanQing,
> 
> + LAKML + Mark + Will
> 
> Am 04.12.19 um 05:55 schrieb Wang YanQing:
>> I use "perf record" to debug performance issue on RTD1296 SOC, it does't work, but
>> the "perf stat" is ok!
> 
> Thanks for the report - which board, branch and (base) tag are you
> testing against? And are you building perf yourself from kernel sources,
> or are you using some distro package?
> 
> I only have Busybox in my initrd on DS418; I have not tested perf.
> 
>> After some dig in the kernel, I find the reason is no pmu overflow interrupt, I think
>> below pmu configuration isn't right for RTD1296:
>> "
>>          arm_pmu: arm-pmu {
>>                  compatible = "arm,cortex-a53-pmu";
>>                  interrupts = <GIC_SPI 48 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>          };
>> "
>>
>> We need 4 PMU SPI for RTD1296 (4 cores), and I guess the 48 isn't right too.
> 
> Note that above rtd129x.dtsi snippet is not complete. See rtd1296.dtsi:
> 
> &arm_pmu {
> 	interrupt-affinity = <&cpu0>, <&cpu1>, <&cpu2>, <&cpu3>;
> };

That doesn't help much, since 4 affinities for one SPI is rather 
nonsensical.

> 48 and high/4 match what I see in the latest BSP:
> 
> https://github.com/BPI-SINOVOIP/BPI-M4-bsp/blob/master/linux-rtk/arch/arm64/boot/dts/realtek/rtd129x/rtd-1296.dtsi#L116
> 
>> Any suggestion is welcome.
>>
>> Thanks!
> 
> The only difference I see is "arm,cortex-a53-pmu" vs. "arm,armv8-pmuv3".
> By my reading of arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c the only difference
> between the two should be the name and an extra cache_map. You could try
> the other compatible string in your .dts, but I doubt it'll help.
> 
> Hopefully the Realtek or Arm guys can shed some light.

If the SoC really has all 4 overflow interrupts combined into a single 
SPI line, then sampling just isn't going to be supported - it's 
unreasonably difficult to handle overflow when the IRQ may be taken on 
the wrong CPU.

Robin.