linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 00/17] Stitch LBR call stack (Perf Tools)

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: <20200417215556.GE21512@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:55:56 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>
To:     "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>,
        jolsa@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
        adrian.hunter@...el.com, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org,
        ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com, alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com,
        vitaly.slobodskoy@...el.com, pavel.gerasimov@...el.com,
        mpe@...erman.id.au, eranian@...gle.com, ak@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 00/17] Stitch LBR call stack (Perf Tools)

Em Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:55:17PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 06:54:02PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > Em Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 05:47:49PM -0400, Liang, Kan escreveu:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 4/17/2020 1:48 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > > Em Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 01:25:00PM -0700, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com escreveu:
> > > > > For a simple test case tchain_edit with 43 depth of call stacks.
> > > > > perf record --call-graph lbr -- ./tchain_edit
> > > > > perf report --stitch-lbr
> > 
> > > > > Without --stitch-lbr, perf report only display 32 depth of call stacks.
> > > > > With --stitch-lbr, perf report can display all 43 depth of call stacks.
> > > > > The depth of call stacks increase 34.3%.
> > 
> > > > > Correspondingly, the processing time of perf report increases 39%,
> > > > > Without --stitch-lbr:                           11.0 sec
> > > > > With --stitch-lbr:                              15.3 sec
> > 
> > > > Next time provide the full test proggie, I had to expand those ... to
> > > > reproduce your results,
> > 
> > > Sure, I will do so in the future.
> > 
> > > > all I have is in perf/core, some patches are
> > > > still to be processed, will continue later, have to stop now, see:
> > 
> > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/commit/?id=13cfba6b741ff
> > 
> > > > For my testing, looks really great!
> > 
> > > Thanks for the testing. :)
> > 
> > My pleasure.
> > 
> > BTW everything is in there by now.
> 
> And I had to do some more fixes to get it building in my container build
> test suite, I've restarted it and now its at this point:
> 
> Fri 17 Apr 2020 06:18:18 PM -03
> $ export PERF_TARBALL=http://192.168.122.1/perf/perf-5.7.0-rc1.tar.xz
> $ dm
>    1   125.76 alpine:3.4                    : Ok   gcc (Alpine 5.3.0) 5.3.0, clang version 3.8.0 (tags/RELEASE_380/final)
>    2   123.16 alpine:3.5                    : Ok   gcc (Alpine 6.2.1) 6.2.1 20160822, clang version 3.8.1 (tags/RELEASE_381/final)
>    3   127.96 alpine:3.6                    : Ok   gcc (Alpine 6.3.0) 6.3.0, clang version 4.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_400/final)
>    4   138.24 alpine:3.7                    : Ok   gcc (Alpine 6.4.0) 6.4.0, Alpine clang version 5.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_500/final) (based on LLVM 5.0.0)
>    5   147.38 alpine:3.8                    : Ok   gcc (Alpine 6.4.0) 6.4.0, Alpine clang version 5.0.1 (tags/RELEASE_501/final) (based on LLVM 5.0.1)
>    6   160.57 alpine:3.9                    : Ok   gcc (Alpine 8.3.0) 8.3.0, Alpine clang version 5.0.1 (tags/RELEASE_502/final) (based on LLVM 5.0.1)
>    7   186.38 alpine:3.10                   : Ok   gcc (Alpine 8.3.0) 8.3.0, Alpine clang version 8.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_800/final) (based on LLVM 8.0.0)
>    8   208.66 alpine:3.11                   : Ok   gcc (Alpine 9.2.0) 9.2.0, Alpine clang version 9.0.0 (https://git.alpinelinux.org/aports f7f0d2c2b8bcd6a5843401a9a702029556492689) (based on LLVM 9.0.0)
>    9   176.99 alpine:edge                   : Ok   gcc (Alpine 9.2.0) 9.2.0, Alpine clang version 9.0.1 (git://git.alpinelinux.org/aports 6c34b9a10bcdcdac04a11569c50b61fb50c4ea6e) (based on LLVM 9.0.1)
>   10    86.14 alt:p8                        : Ok   x86_64-alt-linux-gcc (GCC) 5.3.1 20151207 (ALT p8 5.3.1-alt3.M80P.1), clang version 3.8.0 (tags/RELEASE_380/final)
>   11    99.43 alt:p9                        : Ok   x86_64-alt-linux-gcc (GCC) 8.3.1 20190507 (ALT p9 8.3.1-alt5), clang version 7.0.1
>   12   104.78 alt:sisyphus                  : Ok   x86_64-alt-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.2.1 20200123 (ALT Sisyphus 9.2.1-alt3), clang version 9.0.1
>   13    77.72 amazonlinux:1                 : Ok   gcc (GCC) 7.2.1 20170915 (Red Hat 7.2.1-2), clang version 3.6.2 (tags/RELEASE_362/final)
>   14   120.69 amazonlinux:2                 : Ok   gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180712 (Red Hat 7.3.1-6), clang version 7.0.1 (Amazon Linux 2 7.0.1-1.amzn2.0.2)
>   15    24.96 android-ndk:r12b-arm          : Ok   arm-linux-androideabi-gcc (GCC) 4.9.x 20150123 (prerelease)
>   16    25.73 android-ndk:r15c-arm          : Ok   arm-linux-androideabi-gcc (GCC) 4.9.x 20150123 (prerelease)
>   17    22.34 centos:5                      : Ok   gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-55)
>   18    31.91 centos:6                      : Ok   gcc (GCC) 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-23)
>   19    36.18 centos:7                      : Ok   gcc (GCC) 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-39)
>   20   129.17 centos:8                      : Ok   gcc (GCC) 8.3.1 20190507 (Red Hat 8.3.1-4), clang version 8.0.1 (Red Hat 8.0.1-1.module_el8.1.0+215+a01033fb)
>   21: clearlinux:latest

Just as I pressed the send hotkey:

  21    45.71 clearlinux:latest             : Ok   gcc (Clear Linux OS for Intel Architecture) 9.3.1 20200325 releases/gcc-9.3.0-55-gdff885cdc0, clang version 9.0.1


:-)

- Arnaldo