From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0EC9C4332F for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:20:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230216AbiKBIUG (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 04:20:06 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55088 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230182AbiKBIUD (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 04:20:03 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5511427175; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 01:20:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2A26oTe3001526; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:45 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=content-type : mime-version : subject : from : in-reply-to : date : cc : content-transfer-encoding : message-id : references : to; s=pp1; bh=js1Lu0//I9VGl7gfT9uz8O/3ugKZA96/iR1SoLjuf6g=; b=D7WKNDLVY5LD7z5t6iX30aZJYQtdPTpyxHEYM3qvw75yAy1AiKFwN0gHMG7pjGpPjbEy +HEMaCabMTorWiLlvaCm4IssmnZrFihAttFmHVbTvrly/7kZlWiJDWYNsfPVXcixNyxz 5/RapZK+UPux6NM6ePZ9e34lF+wqcGkINURoOSM02TTVwN7zlGzwTaPXOFKSY/noGp53 q92VB9o+4I46kRkXcF8+s5EQMhIMWEXWMb2h8jKeEbI5x2bSDYifJANpo1Yy99FpEyp6 Ijbhu3/x2N+VJie4OhaJ4wsVY4MNUTEXMbjuXKLmxbhec+z1/Ab7KdCZWKzw0lCc73Ka eg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3kkh3qy1nw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:19:45 +0000 Received: from m0127361.ppops.net (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2A28BgR9021824; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:44 GMT Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3kkh3qy1nc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:19:44 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 2A286c8n006948; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:42 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay10.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.195]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3kgut969aq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:19:42 +0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 2A28Jdfb655986 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:39 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60821A404D; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA6D5A4040; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [9.43.40.163]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:36 +0000 (GMT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH] [perf/core: Update sample_flags for raw_data in perf_output_sample From: Athira Rajeev In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 13:49:34 +0530 Cc: Ian Rogers , Madhavan Srinivasan , Nageswara Sastry , LKML , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, James Clark , Jiri Olsa , Kajol Jain , Namhyung Kim , disgoel@linux.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <164ED8DD-C9A0-40C2-AA12-EB8FA9D4C4C1@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20221020070657.21571-1-atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Peter Zijlstra X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: adkodxSF1G9EWweVkaq_Agl-B2UyfgJj X-Proofpoint-GUID: xoh5G8LW7eUt5W0p11G7KN0OWnHqXz64 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.895,Hydra:6.0.545,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-11-02_04,2022-11-01_02,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1011 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2210170000 definitions=main-2211020048 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On 20-Oct-2022, at 8:10 PM, Peter Zijlstra = wrote: >=20 > On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 12:36:56PM +0530, Athira Rajeev wrote: >> commit 838d9bb62d13 ("perf: Use sample_flags for raw_data") >> added check for PERF_SAMPLE_RAW in sample_flags in >> perf_prepare_sample(). But while copying the sample in memory, >> the check for sample_flags is not added in perf_output_sample(). >> Fix adds the same in perf_output_sample as well. >>=20 >> Fixes: 838d9bb62d13 ("perf: Use sample_flags for raw_data") >> Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev >> --- >> kernel/events/core.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>=20 >> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c >> index 4ec3717003d5..daf387c75d33 100644 >> --- a/kernel/events/core.c >> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c >> @@ -7099,7 +7099,7 @@ void perf_output_sample(struct = perf_output_handle *handle, >> if (sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_RAW) { >> struct perf_raw_record *raw =3D data->raw; >>=20 >> - if (raw) { >> + if (raw && (data->sample_flags & PERF_SAMPLE_RAW)) { >> struct perf_raw_frag *frag =3D &raw->frag; >>=20 >> perf_output_put(handle, raw->size); >=20 > Urgh.. something smells here. We already did a PERF_SAMPLE_RAW test. >=20 > And perf_prepare_sample() explicitly makes data->raw be NULL when not > set earlier. >=20 > So what's going wrong? Hi Peter, Sorry for late response. I was out on vacation couple of days. I didn't hit any specific issue or fail with current code. But patch = intention was to keep the perf_prepare_sample and perf_output_sample to be in sync = with the checks that we are doing. Thanks Athira From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89F7CC433FE for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:20:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4N2KbG0Fvqz3cMk for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 19:20:58 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=D7WKNDLV; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=linux.vnet.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=D7WKNDLV; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4N2KZ90M0vz2yxd for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 19:19:59 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2A26oTe3001526; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:45 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=content-type : mime-version : subject : from : in-reply-to : date : cc : content-transfer-encoding : message-id : references : to; s=pp1; bh=js1Lu0//I9VGl7gfT9uz8O/3ugKZA96/iR1SoLjuf6g=; b=D7WKNDLVY5LD7z5t6iX30aZJYQtdPTpyxHEYM3qvw75yAy1AiKFwN0gHMG7pjGpPjbEy +HEMaCabMTorWiLlvaCm4IssmnZrFihAttFmHVbTvrly/7kZlWiJDWYNsfPVXcixNyxz 5/RapZK+UPux6NM6ePZ9e34lF+wqcGkINURoOSM02TTVwN7zlGzwTaPXOFKSY/noGp53 q92VB9o+4I46kRkXcF8+s5EQMhIMWEXWMb2h8jKeEbI5x2bSDYifJANpo1Yy99FpEyp6 Ijbhu3/x2N+VJie4OhaJ4wsVY4MNUTEXMbjuXKLmxbhec+z1/Ab7KdCZWKzw0lCc73Ka eg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3kkh3qy1nw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:19:45 +0000 Received: from m0127361.ppops.net (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2A28BgR9021824; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:44 GMT Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3kkh3qy1nc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:19:44 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 2A286c8n006948; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:42 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay10.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.195]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3kgut969aq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:19:42 +0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 2A28Jdfb655986 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:39 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60821A404D; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA6D5A4040; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [9.43.40.163]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:19:36 +0000 (GMT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH] [perf/core: Update sample_flags for raw_data in perf_output_sample From: Athira Rajeev In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 13:49:34 +0530 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <164ED8DD-C9A0-40C2-AA12-EB8FA9D4C4C1@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20221020070657.21571-1-atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Peter Zijlstra X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: adkodxSF1G9EWweVkaq_Agl-B2UyfgJj X-Proofpoint-GUID: xoh5G8LW7eUt5W0p11G7KN0OWnHqXz64 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.895,Hydra:6.0.545,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-11-02_04,2022-11-01_02,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1011 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2210170000 definitions=main-2211020048 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Ian Rogers , Madhavan Srinivasan , Nageswara Sastry , Kajol Jain , LKML , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, James Clark , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , disgoel@linux.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" > On 20-Oct-2022, at 8:10 PM, Peter Zijlstra = wrote: >=20 > On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 12:36:56PM +0530, Athira Rajeev wrote: >> commit 838d9bb62d13 ("perf: Use sample_flags for raw_data") >> added check for PERF_SAMPLE_RAW in sample_flags in >> perf_prepare_sample(). But while copying the sample in memory, >> the check for sample_flags is not added in perf_output_sample(). >> Fix adds the same in perf_output_sample as well. >>=20 >> Fixes: 838d9bb62d13 ("perf: Use sample_flags for raw_data") >> Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev >> --- >> kernel/events/core.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>=20 >> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c >> index 4ec3717003d5..daf387c75d33 100644 >> --- a/kernel/events/core.c >> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c >> @@ -7099,7 +7099,7 @@ void perf_output_sample(struct = perf_output_handle *handle, >> if (sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_RAW) { >> struct perf_raw_record *raw =3D data->raw; >>=20 >> - if (raw) { >> + if (raw && (data->sample_flags & PERF_SAMPLE_RAW)) { >> struct perf_raw_frag *frag =3D &raw->frag; >>=20 >> perf_output_put(handle, raw->size); >=20 > Urgh.. something smells here. We already did a PERF_SAMPLE_RAW test. >=20 > And perf_prepare_sample() explicitly makes data->raw be NULL when not > set earlier. >=20 > So what's going wrong? Hi Peter, Sorry for late response. I was out on vacation couple of days. I didn't hit any specific issue or fail with current code. But patch = intention was to keep the perf_prepare_sample and perf_output_sample to be in sync = with the checks that we are doing. Thanks Athira