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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 01 May 2020 16:29:27 +0100
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To:     Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
        Al Grant <Al.Grant@....com>, James Clark <James.Clark@....com>,
        tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: perf_event: Fix time_offset for arch timer

On 2020-05-01 16:14, Leo Yan wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 05:18:15PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 06:04:36PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 04:29:23PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> >
>> > > I wonder if we could/should make __sched_clock_offset available even when
>> > > CONFIG_HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK isn't defined. It feels like it would
>> > > help with this particular can or worm...
>> >
>> > Errrgh. __sched_clock_offset is only needed on x86 because we transition
>> > from one clock device to another on boot. It really shouldn't exist on
>> > anything sane.
>> 
>> I think we still transition from jiffies on arm64, because we don't 
>> register
>> with sched_clock until the timer driver probes. Marc, is that right?
>> 
>> > Let me try and understand your particular problem better.
>> 
>> I think the long and short of it is that userspace needs a way to 
>> convert
>> the raw counter cycles into a ns value that can be compared against 
>> values
>> coming out of sched_clock. To do this accurately, I think it needs the
>> cycles value at the point when sched_clock was initialised.
> 
> Will's understanding is exactly what I want to resolve in this patch.
> 
> The background info is for the ARM SPE [1] decoding with perf tool, if
> the timestamp is enabled, it uses the generic timer's counter as
> timestamp source.  SPE trace data only contains the raw counter cycles,
> as Will mentioned, the perf tool needs to convert it to a coordinate
> value with sched_clock.  This is why this patch tries to calculate the
> offset between the raw counter's ns value and sched_clock, eventually
> this offset value will be used by SPE's decoding code in Perf tool to
> calibrate a 'correct' timestamp.
> 
> Based on your suggestions, I will use __sched_clock_offset to resolve
> the accuracy issue in patch v2.  (I noticed Peter suggested to use a
> new API for wrapping clock_data structure, IIUC, __sched_clock_offset
> is more straightforward for this case).

I think Peter's point was *not* to use __sched_clock_offset which
appears to be only there for the purpose of an x86 workaround (and not
available to other architecture), but to instead expose the relevant
field (epoch_cyc) to the perf subsystem.

I feel it makes sense to make this a generic API, and see whether x86
can move over to it rather than the other way around.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists