linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf: arm_pmu: Only show online CPUs in device's "cpus" attribute

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: <ZmJRhSWYxb-zLAhD@google.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 17:17:09 -0700
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...wei.com>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, yangyicong@...ilicon.com,
	will@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, acme@...nel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
	alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
	james.clark@....com, dongli.zhang@...cle.com,
	jonathan.cameron@...wei.com, prime.zeng@...ilicon.com,
	linuxarm@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf: arm_pmu: Only show online CPUs in device's
 "cpus" attribute

On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 03:43:35PM +0800, Yicong Yang wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> 
> On 2024/6/4 0:20, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:33 AM Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...wei.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>
> >>
> >> When there're CPUs offline after system booting, perf will failed:
> >> [root@...alhost ~]# /home/yang/perf stat -a -e armv8_pmuv3_0/cycles/
> >> Error:
> >> The sys_perf_event_open() syscall returned with 19 (No such device) for event (cpu-clock).
> >> /bin/dmesg | grep -i perf may provide additional information.
> > 
> > Thanks for debugging this Yicong! The fact cycles is falling back on
> > cpu-clock I'm confused by, on ARM the PMU type generally isn't
> > PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE and so this fallback shouldn't happen:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/util/evsel.c?h=perf-tools-next#n2900
> > I note your command line is for system wide event opening rather than
> > for a process. It is more strange the fallback is giving "No such
> > device".
> > 
> >> This is due to PMU's "cpus" is not updated and still contains offline
> >> CPUs and perf will try to open perf event on the offlined CPUs.
> > 
> > The perf tool will try to only open online CPUs. Unfortunately the
> > naming around this is confusing:
> > 
> > - any - an event may follow a task and schedule on "any" CPU. We
> > encode this with -1.
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/lib/perf/include/perf/cpumap.h?h=perf-tools-next#n24
> > - online - the set of online CPU.
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/lib/perf/include/perf/cpumap.h?h=perf-tools-next#n33
> > - all - I try to avoid this but it may still be in the code, "all"
> > usually is another name for online. Hopefully when we use this name it
> > is clearly defined:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/lib/perf/include/internal/evlist.h?h=perf-tools-next#n23
> > 
> >> Make "cpus" attribute only shows online CPUs and introduced a new
> >> "supported_cpus" where users can get the range of the CPUs this
> >> PMU supported monitoring.
> > 
> > I don't think this should be necessary as by default the CPUs the perf
> > tool will use will be the "online" CPUs:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/lib/perf/evlist.c?h=perf-tools-next#n40
> > 
> > Could you create a reproduction of the problem you are encountering?
> > My expectation is for a core PMU to advertise the online and offline
> > CPUs it is valid for, and for perf to intersect:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/lib/perf/include/perf/cpumap.h?h=perf-tools-next#n44
> > those CPUs with the online CPUs so the perf_event_open doesn't fail.
> > 
> 
> Thanks for the comments and detailed illustration!
> 
> Actually it can be reproduced easily using the armv8_pmuv3's events. Tested on 6.10-rc1 with
> perf version 6.10.rc1.g1613e604df0c:
> # offline any CPU
> [root@...alhost tmp]# echo 0 > /sys//devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
> # try any event of armv8_pmuv3, with -a or without
> [root@...alhost tmp]# ./perf stat -e armv8_pmuv3_0/ll_cache/ -vvv
> Control descriptor is not initialized
> Opening: armv8_pmuv3_0/ll_cache/
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> perf_event_attr:
>   type                             10 (armv8_pmuv3_0)
>   size                             136
>   config                           0x32 (ll_cache)
>   sample_type                      IDENTIFIER
>   read_format                      TOTAL_TIME_ENABLED|TOTAL_TIME_RUNNING
>   disabled                         1
>   inherit                          1
>   exclude_guest                    1
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> sys_perf_event_open: pid -1  cpu 0  group_fd -1  flags 0x8 = 3
> Opening: armv8_pmuv3_0/ll_cache/
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> perf_event_attr:
>   type                             10 (armv8_pmuv3_0)
>   size                             136
>   config                           0x32 (ll_cache)
>   sample_type                      IDENTIFIER
>   read_format                      TOTAL_TIME_ENABLED|TOTAL_TIME_RUNNING
>   disabled                         1
>   inherit                          1
>   exclude_guest                    1
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> sys_perf_event_open: pid -1  cpu 1  group_fd -1  flags 0x8
> sys_perf_event_open failed, error -19
> Error:
> The sys_perf_event_open() syscall returned with 19 (No such device) for event (armv8_pmuv3_0/ll_cache/).
> /bin/dmesg | grep -i perf may provide additional information.
> 
> As you can see, we're trying to open event on CPU 0 first (succeed) and then CPU 1 but
> failed on CPU1. Actually we don't enter any branch which handle the evsel->cpus in
> __perf_evlist__propagate_maps() so the evsel->cpus keeps as is which should be initialized
> from the pmu->cpumask. You referenced to [1] but in this case perf_evsel->system_wide == false
> as I checked. perf_evsel->system_wide will set to true in perf_evlist__go_system_wide() and it
> maybe only set for dummy events. Please correct me if I misread here.

Yes, this is confusing.  IIRC evsel->system_wide is for tracking (dummy)
events to collect side band events (like for Intel-PT) regardless of
command line options (like -a or -C).

Thanks,
Namhyung

> 
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/lib/perf/evlist.c?h=perf-tools-next#n40
> 
> Thanks.
>