From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
To: "André Przywara" <andre.przywara@arm.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Wei Li <liwei391@huawei.com>, James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Grant <Al.Grant@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/14] perf arm-spe: Add support for ARMv8.3-SPE
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 13:10:31 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201021051031.GE7226@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9c74082b-fccf-7713-b98d-50da76c5d7af@arm.com>
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 10:54:44PM +0100, André Przywara wrote:
> On 29/09/2020 14:39, Leo Yan wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > From: Wei Li <liwei391@huawei.com>
> >
> > This patch is to support Armv8.3 extension for SPE, it adds alignment
> > field in the Events packet and it supports the Scalable Vector Extension
> > (SVE) for Operation packet and Events packet with two additions:
> >
> > - The vector length for SVE operations in the Operation Type packet;
> > - The incomplete predicate and empty predicate fields in the Events
> > packet.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wei Li <liwei391@huawei.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > .../arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++-
> > .../arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.h | 6 ++
> > 2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c b/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c
> > index 05a4c74399d7..3ec381fddfcb 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c
> > @@ -342,14 +342,73 @@ int arm_spe_pkt_desc(const struct arm_spe_pkt *packet, char *buf,
> > return ret;
> > }
> > }
> > + if (idx > 2) {
>
> As I mentioned in the other patch, I doubt this extra comparison is
> useful. Does that protect us from anything?
It's the same reason with Event packet which have explained for replying
patch 10, the condition is to respect the SPE specifiction:
E[11], byte 1, bit [11], when SZ == 0b10 , or SZ == 0b11
Alignment.
...
Otherwise this bit reads-as-zero.
So we gives higher priority for checking payload size than the Event
bit setting; if you have other thinking for this, please let me know.
> > + if (payload & SPE_EVT_PKT_ALIGNMENT) {
>
> Mmh, but this is bit 11, right?
Yes.
> So would need to go into the (idx > 1)
> section (covering bits 8-15)? Another reason to ditch this comparison above.
As has explained in patch 10, idx is not the same thing with "sz"
field; "idx" stands for payload length in bytes, so:
idx = 1 << sz
The spec defines the sz is 2 or 3, thus idx is 4 or 8; so this is why
here use the condition "(idx > 2)".
I think here need to refine code for more explict expression so can
avoid confusion. So I think it's better to condition such like:
if (payload_len >= 4) {
...
}
> > + ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " ALIGNMENT");
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > + buf += ret;
> > + blen -= ret;
>
> Shouldn't we use the new arm_spe_pkt_snprintf() function here as well?
> Or is there a reason that this doesn't work?
Goot point. Will change to use arm_spe_pkt_snprintf().
> > + }
> > + if (payload & SPE_EVT_PKT_SVE_PARTIAL_PREDICATE) {
> > + ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " SVE-PARTIAL-PRED");
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > + buf += ret;
> > + blen -= ret;
> > + }
> > + if (payload & SPE_EVT_PKT_SVE_EMPTY_PREDICATE) {
> > + ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " SVE-EMPTY-PRED");
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > + buf += ret;
> > + blen -= ret;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > return buf_len - blen;
> >
> > case ARM_SPE_OP_TYPE:
> > switch (idx) {
> > case SPE_OP_PKT_HDR_CLASS_OTHER:
> > - return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&buf, &blen,
> > - payload & SPE_OP_PKT_OTHER_SUBCLASS_COND ?
> > - "COND-SELECT" : "INSN-OTHER");
> > + if ((payload & SPE_OP_PKT_OTHER_SVE_SUBCLASS_MASK) ==
> > + SPE_OP_PKT_OTHER_SUBCLASS_SVG_OP) {
> > +
> > + ret = arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&buf, &blen, "SVE-OTHER");
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* Effective vector length: step is 32 bits */
> > + ret = arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&buf, &blen, " EVLEN %d",
> > + 32 << ((payload & SPE_OP_PKT_SVE_EVL_MASK) >>
> > + SPE_OP_PKT_SVE_EVL_SHIFT));
>
> Can you move this into a macro, and add a comment about how this works?
> People might get confused over the "32 << something".
Yeah, will refine for it.
Thanks,
Leo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-21 5:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-29 13:39 [PATCH v2 00/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor decoding & dumping flow Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 01/14] perf arm-spe: Include bitops.h for BIT() macro Leo Yan
2020-10-08 13:44 ` André Przywara
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 02/14] perf arm-spe: Fix a typo in comment Leo Yan
2020-10-08 13:44 ` André Przywara
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 03/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor payload length calculation Leo Yan
2020-10-08 13:44 ` André Przywara
2020-10-12 0:21 ` Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 04/14] perf arm-spe: Fix packet length handling Leo Yan
2020-10-08 13:45 ` André Przywara
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 05/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor printing string to buffer Leo Yan
2020-10-08 13:46 ` André Przywara
2020-10-12 0:29 ` Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 06/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor packet header parsing Leo Yan
2020-10-08 19:49 ` André Przywara
2020-10-12 1:00 ` Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 07/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor address packet handling Leo Yan
2020-10-19 9:01 ` André Przywara
2020-10-19 10:41 ` Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 08/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor context " Leo Yan
2020-10-20 21:53 ` André Przywara
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 09/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor counter " Leo Yan
2020-10-20 21:53 ` André Przywara
2020-10-21 3:52 ` Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 10/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor event type handling Leo Yan
2020-10-20 21:54 ` André Przywara
2020-10-21 4:54 ` Leo Yan
2020-10-21 9:20 ` André Przywara
2020-10-21 10:13 ` Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 11/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor operation packet handling Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 12/14] perf arm-spe: Add more sub classes for operation packet Leo Yan
2020-10-20 21:54 ` André Przywara
2020-10-21 5:16 ` Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 13/14] perf arm_spe: Decode memory tagging properties Leo Yan
2020-09-29 13:39 ` [PATCH v2 14/14] perf arm-spe: Add support for ARMv8.3-SPE Leo Yan
2020-10-20 21:54 ` André Przywara
2020-10-21 5:10 ` Leo Yan [this message]
2020-10-21 9:26 ` André Przywara
2020-10-21 10:17 ` Leo Yan
2020-10-21 14:53 ` André Przywara
2020-10-22 0:44 ` Leo Yan
2020-10-13 14:53 ` [PATCH v2 00/14] perf arm-spe: Refactor decoding & dumping flow Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-10-13 15:19 ` Leo Yan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201021051031.GE7226@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s \
--to=leo.yan@linaro.org \
--cc=Al.Grant@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=james.clark@arm.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liwei391@huawei.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).