[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z2XVhey0Xg5yYoQa@x1>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 17:37:25 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: "Falcon, Thomas" <thomas.falcon@...el.com>
Cc: "ravi.bangoria@....com" <ravi.bangoria@....com>,
"alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com" <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
"namhyung@...nel.org" <namhyung@...nel.org>,
"jolsa@...nel.org" <jolsa@...nel.org>,
"kan.liang@...ux.intel.com" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
"irogers@...gle.com" <irogers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] perf script: Fix output type for dynamically
allocated core PMU's
On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 08:30:11PM +0000, Falcon, Thomas wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-12-20 at 16:16 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 03:54:21PM -0600, Thomas Falcon wrote:
> > > perf script output may show different fields on different core
> > > PMU's
> > > that exist on heterogeneous platforms. For example,
> > >
> > > perf record -e "{cpu_core/mem-loads-aux/,cpu_core/event=0xcd,\
> > > umask=0x01,ldlat=3,name=MEM_UOPS_RETIRED.LOAD_LATENCY/}:upp"\
> > > -c10000 -W -d -a -- sleep 1
> > >
> > > perf script:
> > >
> > > chromium-browse 46572 [002] 544966.882384:
> > > 10000 cpu_core/MEM_UOPS_RETIRED.LOAD_LATENCY/: 7ffdf1391b0c 10268100142\
> > > |OP LOAD|LVL L1 hit|SNP None|TLB L1 or L2 hit|LCK No|BLK N/A
> > > 5 7 0 7fad7c47425d [unknown] (/usr/lib64/libglib-
> > > 2.0.so.0.8000.3)
> > >
> > > perf record -e cpu_atom/event=0xd0,umask=0x05,ldlat=3,\
> > > name=MEM_UOPS_RETIRED.LOAD_LATENCY/upp -c10000 -W -d -a -- sleep 1
> > >
> > > perf script:
> > >
> > > gnome-control-c 534224 [023] 544951.816227: 10000
> > > cpu_atom/MEM_UOPS_RETIRED.LOAD_LATENCY/: 7f0aaaa0aae0 [unknown]
> > > (/usr/lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.8000.3)
> > >
> > > Some fields, such as data_src, are not included by default.
> > >
> > > The cause is that while one PMU may be assigned a type such as
> > > PERF_TYPE_RAW, other core PMU's are dynamically allocated at boot
> > > time.
> > > If this value does not match an existing PERF_TYPE_X value,
> > > output_type(perf_event_attr.type) will return OUTPUT_TYPE_OTHER.
> > >
> > > Instead search for a core PMU with a matching perf_event_attr type
> > > and, if one is found, return PERF_TYPE_RAW to match output of other
> > > core PMU's.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@...el.com>
> > > ---
> > > v2: restrict pmu lookup to platforms with more than one core pmu
> > > v3: only scan core pmu list
> > > ---
> > > tools/perf/builtin-script.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c b/tools/perf/builtin-
> > > script.c
> > > index 9e47905f75a6..685232883f9c 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
> > > @@ -384,6 +384,19 @@ static int evsel_script__fprintf(struct
> > > evsel_script *es, FILE *fp)
> > > st.st_size / 1024.0 / 1024.0, es->filename,
> > > es->samples);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static bool output_type_many_core_pmus(unsigned int type)
> > > +{
> > > + struct perf_pmu *pmu = NULL;
> > > +
> > > + if (perf_pmus__num_core_pmus() > 1) {
> > > + while ((pmu = perf_pmus__scan_core(pmu)) != NULL)
> > > {
> > > + if (pmu->type == type)
> > > + return true;
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > + return false;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > static inline int output_type(unsigned int type)
> > > {
> > > switch (type) {
> > > @@ -394,6 +407,9 @@ static inline int output_type(unsigned int
> > > type)
> > > return type;
> > > }
> > >
> > > + if (output_type_many_core_pmus(type))
> > > + return PERF_TYPE_RAW;
> > > +
> > > return OUTPUT_TYPE_OTHER;
> > > }
> >
> > Can you please test the patch below so that we don't do this while
> > loop
> > in all calls to output_type when we have more than one core pmu?
> >
> > I haven't tested this patch, so please see if your patch on top of it
> > produces the desired result.
>
> Hi Arnaldo, it looks good to me.
Thanks, added an
Acked-by: Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@...el.com>
To that cset,
Doing some test build test accross a number of distros now, will push
that out and then try to see if your patch applies cleanly or do the
adjustment to apply it.
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists