linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Refactor precise

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: <b097dc88-f66c-4f0d-b694-aefb73128fad@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2025 12:01:36 -0800
From: "Chen, Zide" <zide.chen@...el.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
 Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
 thomas.falcon@...el.com, dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com, xudong.hao@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Refactor precise_ip fallback logic



On 11/11/2025 11:34 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 11:11:45AM -0800, Chen, Zide wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/10/2025 11:50 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 07, 2025 at 02:31:23PM -0800, Chen, Zide wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/7/2025 1:42 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 05:23:09PM -0800, Chen, Zide wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/6/2025 10:52 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> 
>>>>> Can you run these commands and show the output here?
>>>>>
>>>>>   $ perf record -e task-clock:S  true
>>>>>   $ perf evlist -v
>>>>
>>>> On 6.18.0-rc4:
>>>>
>>>> $ perf record -e task-clock:S  true
>>>> [ perf record: Woken up 2 times to write data ]
>>>> [ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.006 MB perf.data ]
>>>>
>>>> $ perf evlist -v
>>>> task-clock:Su: type: 1 (PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE), size: 136, config: 0x1
>>>> (PERF_COUNT_SW_TASK_CLOCK), { sample_period, sample_freq }: 4000,
>>>> sample_type: IP|TID|TIME|READ|ID|PERIOD, read_format: ID|LOST, disabled:
>>>> 1, inherit: 1, exclude_kernel: 1, exclude_hv: 1, mmap: 1, comm: 1, freq:
>>>> 1, enable_on_exec: 1, task: 1, sample_id_all: 1, mmap2: 1, comm_exec: 1,
>>>> ksymbol: 1, bpf_event: 1, build_id: 1
>>>
>>> Thanks for sharing this.  Yep, it has the inherit bit.
>>>
>>> I think there's a bug in the missing feature test.  Indeed, it should
>>> also have PERF_SAMPLE_TID for the test according to the kernel comment.
>>>
>>> 	/*
>>> 	 * We do not support PERF_SAMPLE_READ on inherited events unless
>>> 	 * PERF_SAMPLE_TID is also selected, which allows inherited events to
>>> 	 * collect per-thread samples.
>>> 	 * See perf_output_read().
>>> 	 */
>>> 	if (has_inherit_and_sample_read(attr) && !(attr->sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_TID))
>>> 		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>>
>> It seems that the purpose of the inherit_sample_read fallback is to
>> remove the inherit attribute when both PERF_SAMPLE_READ and inherit are
>> present, but PERF_SAMPLE_TID is not. The new change may not be able to
>> accomplish this?
> 
> No, the purpose of the missing feature check is to detect whether the
> current kernel supports this feature or not.  The correct check should
> pass both READ and TID together.


OK, thanks!

> Thanks,
> Namhyung
>