All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@arm.com>
Cc: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	anton@samba.org, peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, treeze.taeung@gmail.com,
	borntraeger@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/annotate: Fix branch instruction with multiple operands
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 10:09:56 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170601130956.GC2899@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170526182310.6e253240645df02342fe24c3@arm.com>

Em Fri, May 26, 2017 at 06:23:10PM -0500, Kim Phillips escreveu:
> From: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> Perf annotate is dropping the cr* fields from branch instructions.
> Fix it by adding support to display branch instructions having
> multiple operands.
> 
> Objdump of int_sqrt:
> 
>  20.36 | c0000000004d2694:   subf   r10,r10,r3
>        | c0000000004d2698: v bgt    cr6,c0000000004d26a0 <int_sqrt+0x40>
>   1.82 | c0000000004d269c:   mr     r3,r10
>  29.18 | c0000000004d26a0:   mr     r10,r8
>        | c0000000004d26a4: v bgt    cr7,c0000000004d26ac <int_sqrt+0x4c>
>        | c0000000004d26a8:   mr     r10,r7
> 
> Before Patch:
> 
>  20.36 |       subf   r10,r10,r3
>        |     v bgt    40
>   1.82 |       mr     r3,r10
>  29.18 | 40:   mr     r10,r8
>        |     v bgt    4c
>        |       mr     r10,r7
> 
> After patch:
> 
>  20.36 |       subf   r10,r10,r3
>        |     v bgt    cr6,40
>   1.82 |       mr     r3,r10
>  29.18 | 40:   mr     r10,r8
>        |     v bgt    cr7,4c
>        |       mr     r10,r7
> 
> Reported-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
> Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> Reduced to keep only one scnprintf and supplemented for AArch64
> conditional branch instructions:
> 
> Non-simplified (raw objdump) view:
> 
>        │ffff0000083cd11c: ↑ cbz    w0, ffff0000083cd100 <security_fil▒
> ...
>   4.44 │ffff000│083cd134: ↓ tbnz   w0, #26, ffff0000083cd190 <securit▒
> ...
>   1.37 │ffff000│083cd144: ↓ tbnz   w22, #5, ffff0000083cd1a4 <securit▒
>        │ffff000│083cd148:   mov    w19, #0x20000                   //▒
>   1.02 │ffff000│083cd14c: ↓ tbz    w22, #2, ffff0000083cd1ac <securit▒
> ...
>   0.68 │ffff000└──3cd16c: ↑ cbnz   w0, ffff0000083cd120 <security_fil▒
> 
> Simplified, before this patch:
> 
>        │    ↑ cbz    40                                              ▒
> ...
>   4.44 │   │↓ tbnz   w0, #26, ffff0000083cd190 <security_file_permiss▒
> ...
>   1.37 │   │↓ tbnz   w22, #5, ffff0000083cd1a4 <security_file_permiss▒
>        │   │  mov    w19, #0x20000                   // #131072      ▒
>   1.02 │   │↓ tbz    w22, #2, ffff0000083cd1ac <security_file_permiss▒
> ...
>   0.68 │   └──cbnz   60                                              ▒
> 
> the cbz operand is missing, and the tbz doesn't get simplified processing
> at all because the address-get function failed to match an address.
> 
> Simplified, After this patch applied:
> 
>        │    ↑ cbz    w0, 40                                          ▒
> ...
>   4.44 │   │↓ tbnz   w0, #26, d0                                     ▒
> ...
>   1.37 │   │↓ tbnz   w22, #5, e4                                     ▒
>        │   │  mov    w19, #0x20000                   // #131072      ▒
>   1.02 │   │↓ tbz    w22, #2, ec                                     ▒
> ...
>   0.68 │   └──cbnz   w0, 60                                          ▒
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@arm.com>
> Reported-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> ---
> 
> Sorry if any confusion: I thought it easier to merge the changes into
> one patch and resubmit it.  The only patch to apply is this one; I
> tested on powerpc and x86_64 also, and they still work as with Ravi's
> original patch (this one just adds the ARM fixes, and slightly
> optimizes Ravi's original patch).

Humm, authorship info really gests confusing, can't you just have one
commit log, combining the original one with what you did, and attribute
the patch to you and have a:

[acme@jouet linux]$ git log | grep -i originally-by:  | wc -l
58
[acme@jouet linux]$

Originally-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Ravi?

I'm trying to catch up on my patch queue, so haven't read this
thoroughly to have an idea if this is fair or OK, can you guys comment
on it?

- Arnaldo
 
>  tools/perf/util/annotate.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> index 683f8340460c..3174930e7cea 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> @@ -239,10 +239,20 @@ static int jump__parse(struct arch *arch __maybe_unused, struct ins_operands *op
>  	const char *s = strchr(ops->raw, '+');
>  	const char *c = strchr(ops->raw, ',');
>  
> -	if (c++ != NULL)
> +	/*
> +	 * skip over possible up to 2 operands to get to address, e.g.:
> +	 * tbnz	 w0, #26, ffff0000083cd190 <security_file_permission+0xd0>
> +	 */
> +	if (c++ != NULL) {
>  		ops->target.addr = strtoull(c, NULL, 16);
> -	else
> +		if (!ops->target.addr) {
> +			c = strchr(c, ',');
> +			if (c++ != NULL)
> +				ops->target.addr = strtoull(c, NULL, 16);
> +		}
> +	} else {
>  		ops->target.addr = strtoull(ops->raw, NULL, 16);
> +	}
>  
>  	if (s++ != NULL) {
>  		ops->target.offset = strtoull(s, NULL, 16);
> @@ -257,10 +267,27 @@ static int jump__parse(struct arch *arch __maybe_unused, struct ins_operands *op
>  static int jump__scnprintf(struct ins *ins, char *bf, size_t size,
>  			   struct ins_operands *ops)
>  {
> +	const char *c = strchr(ops->raw, ',');
> +
>  	if (!ops->target.addr || ops->target.offset < 0)
>  		return ins__raw_scnprintf(ins, bf, size, ops);
>  
> -	return scnprintf(bf, size, "%-6.6s %" PRIx64, ins->name, ops->target.offset);
> +	if (c != NULL) {
> +		const char *c2 = strchr(c + 1, ',');
> +
> +		/* check for 3-op insn */
> +		if (c2 != NULL)
> +			c = c2;
> +		c++;
> +
> +		/* mirror arch objdump's space-after-comma style */
> +		if (*c == ' ')
> +			c++;
> +	}
> +
> +	return scnprintf(bf, size, "%-6.6s %.*s%" PRIx64,
> +			 ins->name, c ? c - ops->raw : 0, ops->raw,
> +			 ops->target.offset);
>  }
>  
>  static struct ins_ops jump_ops = {
> -- 
> 2.11.0

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-01 13:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-25  5:59 [PATCH] perf/annotate/powerpc: Fix branch instruction with multiple operands Ravi Bangoria
2017-05-26 23:23 ` [PATCH] perf/annotate: " Kim Phillips
2017-06-01 13:09   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
2017-06-01 13:47     ` Ravi Bangoria
2017-06-01 14:29     ` [PATCH v2] " Kim Phillips
2017-06-01 15:03       ` Ravi Bangoria
2017-06-01 16:42         ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2017-06-01 17:50         ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2017-06-07 15:57       ` [tip:perf/urgent] perf annotate: " tip-bot for Kim Phillips

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=20170601130956.GC2899@kernel.org \
    --to=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=kim.phillips@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=treeze.taeung@gmail.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.