[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ab4e2929-a9f7-445d-9eb0-547556799a57@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 11:18:25 -0400
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Yongwei Ma <yongwei.ma@...el.com>, Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 2/5] perf x86/topdown: Correct leader selection with
sample_read enabled
On 2024-07-12 1:03 p.m., Dapeng Mi wrote:
> Addresses an issue where, in the absence of a topdown metrics event
> within a sampling group, the slots event was incorrectly bypassed as
> the sampling leader when sample_read was enabled.
>
> perf record -e '{slots,branches}:S' -c 10000 -vv sleep 1
>
> In this case, the slots event should be sampled as leader but the
> branches event is sampled in fact like the verbose output shows.
>
> perf_event_attr:
> type 4 (cpu)
> size 168
> config 0x400 (slots)
> sample_type IP|TID|TIME|READ|CPU|IDENTIFIER
> read_format ID|GROUP|LOST
> disabled 1
> sample_id_all 1
> exclude_guest 1
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> sys_perf_event_open: pid -1 cpu 0 group_fd -1 flags 0x8 = 5
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> perf_event_attr:
> type 0 (PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE)
> size 168
> config 0x4 (PERF_COUNT_HW_BRANCH_INSTRUCTIONS)
> { sample_period, sample_freq } 10000
> sample_type IP|TID|TIME|READ|CPU|IDENTIFIER
> read_format ID|GROUP|LOST
> sample_id_all 1
> exclude_guest 1
>
> The sample period of slots event instead of branches event is reset to
> 0.
>
> This fix ensures the slots event remains the leader under these
> conditions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> tools/perf/arch/x86/util/topdown.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/topdown.c b/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/topdown.c
> index 49f25d67ed77..857e00cf579f 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/topdown.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/topdown.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> #include "api/fs/fs.h"
> #include "util/evsel.h"
> +#include "util/evlist.h"
> #include "util/pmu.h"
> #include "util/pmus.h"
> #include "util/topdown.h"
> @@ -87,11 +88,22 @@ bool arch_is_topdown_metrics(const struct evsel *evsel)
> */
> bool arch_topdown_sample_read(struct evsel *leader)
> {
> + struct evsel *evsel;
> +
> if (!evsel__sys_has_perf_metrics(leader))
> return false;
>
> - if (arch_is_topdown_slots(leader))
> - return true;
> + if (!arch_is_topdown_slots(leader))
> + return false;
> +
> + /*
> + * If slots event as leader event but no topdown metric events
> + * in group, slots event should still sample as leader.
> + */
> + evlist__for_each_entry(leader->evlist, evsel) {
evsel = leader->leader;
evlist__for_each_entry_continue(leader->evlist, evsel)
if (evsel->leader != leader->leader)
return false;
Maybe we should limit the check in a group, rather than the entire
evlist. Something as above (not tested)?
Thanks,
Kan
> + if (evsel != leader && arch_is_topdown_metrics(evsel))
> + return true;
> + }
>
> return false;
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists