[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6dc9a4e5-8f74-dfb5-d9f6-60e9d6b65146@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 10:21:03 +0000
From: James Clark <james.clark@....com>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, acme@...nel.org
Cc: suzuki.poulose@....com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/8] perf: Capture branch privilege information
On 09/03/2022 03:36, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> Platforms like arm64 could capture privilege level information for all the
> branch records. Hence this adds a new element in the struct branch_entry to
> record the privilege level information, which could be requested through a
> new event.attr.branch_sample_type based flag PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PRIV_SAVE.
> This flag helps user choose whether privilege information is captured.
>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> Cc: linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
> ---
> include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h | 13 ++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> index d29280adc3c4..0e96e2017f68 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -204,6 +204,8 @@ enum perf_branch_sample_type_shift {
>
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX_SHIFT = 17, /* save low level index of raw branch records */
>
> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PRIV_SAVE_SHIFT = 18, /* save privillege mode */
> +
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX_SHIFT /* non-ABI */
> };
>
> @@ -233,6 +235,8 @@ enum perf_branch_sample_type {
>
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX = 1U << PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX_SHIFT,
>
> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PRIV_SAVE = 1U << PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PRIV_SAVE_SHIFT,
> +
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX = 1U << PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX_SHIFT,
> };
>
> @@ -271,6 +275,12 @@ enum {
> PERF_BR_NEW_MAX,
> };
>
> +enum {
> + PERF_BR_USER = 0,
> + PERF_BR_KERNEL = 1,
> + PERF_BR_HV = 2,
> +};
0 should be "PERF_BR_PRIV_UNKNOWN" so userspace knows if it was not enabled
otherwise it will look like all samples are PERF_BR_USER when actually
priv type recording was just disabled.
I think it's not even always possible to go backwards from a sample to
work out what the event attributes were so this can be interpreted (taking
all of perf script and every corner case into account).
Starting at 0=UNKNOWN is consistent with the other fields and makes parsing
it a whole lot easier.
James
> +
> #define PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PLM_ALL \
> (PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_USER|\
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_KERNEL|\
> @@ -1386,7 +1396,8 @@ struct perf_branch_entry {
> cycles:16, /* cycle count to last branch */
> type:4, /* branch type */
> new_type:4, /* additional branch type */
> - reserved:36;
> + priv:2, /* privilege level */
> + reserved:34;
> };
>
> union perf_sample_weight {
Powered by blists - more mailing lists