linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] tools/perf: Add reverse_fn to handle branch

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e9504e62-63c9-de32-5c2d-1c5ca0b86bf0@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Oct 2021 19:59:41 +0530
From:   Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     acme@...nel.org, michael@...erman.id.au, eranian@...gle.com,
        mark.rutland@....com, namhyung@...nel.org, kjain@...ux.ibm.com,
        atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tools/perf: Add reverse_fn to handle branch_stack
 endian issue


On 10/7/21 11:12 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 12:34:09PM +0530, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote:
>> branch_stack struct has bit field definition which
>> produces different bit ordering for big/little endian.
>> Because of this, when branch_stack sample is collected
>> in a BE system and viewed/reported in a LE system, bit
>> fields of the branch stack are not presented properly.
>> To address this issue, a evsel__reverse64_branch_stack_flags()
>> is defined and introduced in evsel__parse_sample.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   tools/perf/util/evsel.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>   tools/perf/util/evsel.h |  5 ++++
>>   2 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
>> index dbfeceb2546c..007be66b69a2 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c
>> @@ -2221,6 +2221,46 @@ void __weak arch_perf_parse_sample_weight(struct perf_sample *data,
>>   	data->weight = *array;
>>   }
>>   
>> +u64 evsel__reverse64_branch_stack_flags(u64 value)
>> +{
>> +	u64 new_val = 0;
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * branch_stack flag (u64)
>> +	 * union {
>> +	 * 	u64 values;
>> +	 * 	struct {
>> +	 * 		mispred:1	//target mispredicted
>> +	 * 		predicted:1	//target predicted
>> +	 * 		in_tx:1		//in transaction
>> +	 * 		abort:1		//transaction abort
>> +	 * 		cycles:16	//cycle count to last branch
>> +	 * 		type:4		//branch type
>> +	 * 		reserved:40
>> +	 * 	}
>> +	 * }
>> +	 */
> please describe in comment how the bitfield is swapped

Sure will do.

>> +	if (bigendian()) {
>> +		new_val = reverse_64(value, 0, 1);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 1, 1);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 2, 1);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 3, 1);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 4, 16);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 20, 4);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 24, 40);
>> +	} else {
>> +		new_val = reverse_64(value, 63, 1);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 62, 1);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 61, 1);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 60, 1);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 44, 16);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 40, 4);
>> +		new_val |= reverse_64(value, 0, 40);
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return new_val;
>> +}
>> +
>>   int evsel__parse_sample(struct evsel *evsel, union perf_event *event,
>>   			struct perf_sample *data)
>>   {
>> @@ -2408,6 +2448,8 @@ int evsel__parse_sample(struct evsel *evsel, union perf_event *event,
>>   	if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK) {
>>   		const u64 max_branch_nr = UINT64_MAX /
>>   					  sizeof(struct branch_entry);
>> +		struct branch_entry *e;
>> +		unsigned int i;
>>   
>>   		OVERFLOW_CHECK_u64(array);
>>   		data->branch_stack = (struct branch_stack *)array++;
>> @@ -2416,10 +2458,28 @@ int evsel__parse_sample(struct evsel *evsel, union perf_event *event,
>>   			return -EFAULT;
>>   
>>   		sz = data->branch_stack->nr * sizeof(struct branch_entry);
>> -		if (evsel__has_branch_hw_idx(evsel))
>> +		if (evsel__has_branch_hw_idx(evsel)) {
>>   			sz += sizeof(u64);
>> -		else
>> +			e = &data->branch_stack->entries[0];
>> +		} else {
>>   			data->no_hw_idx = true;
>> +			e = (struct branch_entry *)&data->branch_stack->hw_idx;
> hum, why do we convert hw_idx? it's the same struct as entries?
> please explain this in comment as well

No. IIUC, hw_idx is valid only if PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX is applied.
If not, then only nr and entries[] will be output-ed by kernel
42bbabed09ce ('perf tools: Add hw_idx in struct branch_stack')

>
>> +		}
>> +
>> +		if (swapped) {
>> +			/*
>> +			 * struct branch_flag does not have endian specific
>> +			 * bit field definition. And bswap will not resolve the
>> +			 * issue, since these are bit fields.
>> +			 *
>> +			 * evsel__reverse64_branch_stack_flags() uses a reverse64
>> +			 * macro to reverse the bit position based on the host
>> +			 * endians.
>> +			 */
>> +			for (i = 0; i < data->branch_stack->nr; i++, e++)
>> +				e->flags.value = evsel__reverse64_branch_stack_flags(e->flags.value);
>> +		}
>> +
>>   		OVERFLOW_CHECK(array, sz, max_size);
>>   		array = (void *)array + sz;
>>   	}
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evsel.h b/tools/perf/util/evsel.h
>> index 1f7edfa8568a..1127c23710cf 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/util/evsel.h
>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evsel.h
>> @@ -482,4 +482,9 @@ struct evsel *evsel__leader(struct evsel *evsel);
>>   bool evsel__has_leader(struct evsel *evsel, struct evsel *leader);
>>   bool evsel__is_leader(struct evsel *evsel);
>>   void evsel__set_leader(struct evsel *evsel, struct evsel *leader);
>> +
>> +#define reverse_64(src, pos, size)	\
>> +	((((src) >> (pos)) & ((1ull << (size)) - 1)) << (63 - ((pos) + (size) - 1)))
> hum, is this reversing anything?
> could you please add comment describing what this is doing?

Sure will do.
Thanks for review
Maddy


> thanks, jirka
>> +
>> +u64 evsel__reverse64_branch_stack_flags(u64 value);
>>   #endif /* __PERF_EVSEL_H */
>> -- 
>> 2.31.1
>>