[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200309193026.GE67774@krava>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 20:30:26 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Cc: Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
"ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"arnaldo.melo@...il.com" <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>,
"jolsa@...nel.org" <jolsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 0/4] bpftool: introduce prog profile
On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 06:24:22PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 9, 2020, at 11:04 AM, Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com> wrote:
> >
> > 2020-03-04 21:39 UTC+0000 ~ Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Mar 4, 2020, at 1:29 PM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 09:16:29PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 4, 2020, at 12:41 PM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 08:08:07PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 10:07:06AM -0800, Song Liu wrote:
> >>>>>>> This set introduces bpftool prog profile command, which uses hardware
> >>>>>>> counters to profile BPF programs.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This command attaches fentry/fexit programs to a target program. These two
> >>>>>>> programs read hardware counters before and after the target program and
> >>>>>>> calculate the difference.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Changes v3 => v4:
> >>>>>>> 1. Simplify err handling in profile_open_perf_events() (Quentin);
> >>>>>>> 2. Remove redundant p_err() (Quentin);
> >>>>>>> 3. Replace tab with space in bash-completion; (Quentin);
> >>>>>>> 4. Fix typo _bpftool_get_map_names => _bpftool_get_prog_names (Quentin).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> hum, I'm getting:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [jolsa@...l-r440-01 bpftool]$ pwd
> >>>>>> /home/jolsa/linux-perf/tools/bpf/bpftool
> >>>>>> [jolsa@...l-r440-01 bpftool]$ make
> >>>>>> ...
> >>>>>> make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/jolsa/linux-perf/tools/lib/bpf'
> >>>>>> LINK _bpftool
> >>>>>> make: *** No rule to make target 'skeleton/profiler.bpf.c', needed by 'skeleton/profiler.bpf.o'. Stop.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ok, I had to apply your patches by hand, because 'git am' refused to
> >>>>> due to fuzz.. so some of you new files did not make it to my tree ;-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> anyway I hit another error now:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> CC prog.o
> >>>>> In file included from prog.c:1553:
> >>>>> profiler.skel.h: In function ‘profiler_bpf__create_skeleton’:
> >>>>> profiler.skel.h:136:35: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>>>> 136 | s->maps[4].mmaped = (void **)&obj->rodata;
> >>>>> | ^~
> >>>>> prog.c: In function ‘profile_read_values’:
> >>>>> prog.c:1650:29: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>>>> 1650 | __u32 m, cpu, num_cpu = obj->rodata->num_cpu;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'll try to figure it out.. might be error on my end
> >>>>>
> >>>>> do you have git repo with these changes?
> >>>>
> >>>> I pushed it to
> >>>>
> >>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/song/linux.git/tree/?h=bpf-per-prog-stats
> >>>
> >>> still the same:
> >>>
> >>> [jolsa@...l-r440-01 bpftool]$ git show --oneline HEAD | head -1
> >>> 7bbda5cca00a bpftool: fix typo in bash-completion
> >>> [jolsa@...l-r440-01 bpftool]$ make
> >>> make[1]: Entering directory '/home/jolsa/linux-perf/tools/lib/bpf'
> >>> make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/jolsa/linux-perf/tools/lib/bpf'
> >>> CC prog.o
> >>> In file included from prog.c:1553:
> >>> profiler.skel.h: In function ‘profiler_bpf__create_skeleton’:
> >>> profiler.skel.h:136:35: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>> 136 | s->maps[4].mmaped = (void **)&obj->rodata;
> >>> | ^~
> >>> prog.c: In function ‘profile_read_values’:
> >>> prog.c:1650:29: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>> 1650 | __u32 m, cpu, num_cpu = obj->rodata->num_cpu;
> >>> | ^~
> >>> prog.c: In function ‘profile_open_perf_events’:
> >>> prog.c:1810:19: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>> 1810 | sizeof(int), obj->rodata->num_cpu * obj->rodata->num_metric);
> >>> | ^~
> >>> prog.c:1810:42: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>> 1810 | sizeof(int), obj->rodata->num_cpu * obj->rodata->num_metric);
> >>> | ^~
> >>> prog.c:1825:26: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>> 1825 | for (cpu = 0; cpu < obj->rodata->num_cpu; cpu++) {
> >>> | ^~
> >>> prog.c: In function ‘do_profile’:
> >>> prog.c:1904:13: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>> 1904 | profile_obj->rodata->num_cpu = num_cpu;
> >>> | ^~
> >>> prog.c:1905:13: error: ‘struct profiler_bpf’ has no member named ‘rodata’
> >>> 1905 | profile_obj->rodata->num_metric = num_metric;
> >>> | ^~
> >>> make: *** [Makefile:129: prog.o] Error 1
> >>
> >> I guess you need a newer version of clang that supports global data in BPF programs.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Song
> >>
> >
> > Thinking about this requirement again... Do you think it would be worth
> > adding (as a follow-up) a feature check on the availability of clang
> > with global data support to bpftool's Makefile? So that we could compile
> > out program profiling if clang is not present or does not support it.
> > Just like libbfd support is optional already.
> >
> > I'm asking mostly because a number of distributions now package bpftool,
> > and e.g. Ubuntu builds it from kernel source when creating its
> > linux-images and linux-tools-* packages. And I am pretty sure the build
> > environment does not have latest clang/LLVM, but it would be great to
> > remain able to build bpftool.
>
> Yeah, I think it is a good idea. Some more Makefile fun. ;)
I think it's good idea, also bpftool is already using feature
detection from tools/build/features.. you can check commits like:
fb982666e380 tools/bpftool: fix bpftool build with bintutils >= 2.9
for adding new feature detection
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists