All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>,
	Robert Walker <robert.walker@arm.com>,
	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>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Coresight ML <coresight@lists.linaro.org>
Cc: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Subject: [PATCH v5 3/5] perf cs-etm: Correct synthesizing instruction samples
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 10:18:09 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200219021811.20067-4-leo.yan@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200219021811.20067-1-leo.yan@linaro.org>

When 'etm->instructions_sample_period' is less than
'tidq->period_instructions', the function cs_etm__sample() cannot handle
this case properly with its logic.

Let's see below flow as an example:

- If we set itrace option '--itrace=i4', then function cs_etm__sample()
  has variables with initialized values:

  tidq->period_instructions = 0
  etm->instructions_sample_period = 4

- When the first packet is coming:

  packet->instr_count = 10; the number of instructions executed in this
  packet is 10, thus update period_instructions as below:

  tidq->period_instructions = 0 + 10 = 10
  instrs_over = 10 - 4 = 6
  offset = 10 - 6 - 1 = 3
  tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over = 6

- When the second packet is coming:

  packet->instr_count = 10; in the second pass, assume 10 instructions
  in the trace sample again:

  tidq->period_instructions = 6 + 10 = 16
  instrs_over = 16 - 4 = 12
  offset = 10 - 12 - 1 = -3  -> the negative value
  tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over = 12

So after handle these two packets, there have below issues:

The first issue is that cs_etm__instr_addr() returns the address within
the current trace sample of the instruction related to offset, so the
offset is supposed to be always unsigned value.  But in fact, function
cs_etm__sample() might calculate a negative offset value (in handling
the second packet, the offset is -3) and pass to cs_etm__instr_addr()
with u64 type with a big positive integer.

The second issue is it only synthesizes 2 samples for sample period = 4.
In theory, every packet has 10 instructions so the two packets have
total 20 instructions, 20 instructions should generate 5 samples
(4 x 5 = 20).  This is because cs_etm__sample() only calls once
cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample() to generate instruction sample per
range packet.

This patch fixes the logic in function cs_etm__sample(); the basic
idea for handling coming packet is:

- To synthesize the first instruction sample, it combines the left
  instructions from the previous packet and the head of the new
  packet; then generate continuous samples with sample period;
- At the tail of the new packet, if it has the rest instructions,
  these instructions will be left for the sequential sample.

Suggested-by: Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
---
 tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c b/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c
index b2f31390126a..4b7d6c36ce3c 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c
@@ -1356,9 +1356,12 @@ static int cs_etm__sample(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq,
 	struct cs_etm_auxtrace *etm = etmq->etm;
 	int ret;
 	u8 trace_chan_id = tidq->trace_chan_id;
-	u64 instrs_executed = tidq->packet->instr_count;
+	u64 instrs_prev;
 
-	tidq->period_instructions += instrs_executed;
+	/* Get instructions remainder from previous packet */
+	instrs_prev = tidq->period_instructions;
+
+	tidq->period_instructions += tidq->packet->instr_count;
 
 	/*
 	 * Record a branch when the last instruction in
@@ -1376,26 +1379,76 @@ static int cs_etm__sample(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq,
 		 * TODO: allow period to be defined in cycles and clock time
 		 */
 
-		/* Get number of instructions executed after the sample point */
-		u64 instrs_over = tidq->period_instructions -
-			etm->instructions_sample_period;
+		/*
+		 * Below diagram demonstrates the instruction samples
+		 * generation flows:
+		 *
+		 *    Instrs     Instrs       Instrs       Instrs
+		 *   Sample(n)  Sample(n+1)  Sample(n+2)  Sample(n+3)
+		 *    |            |            |            |
+		 *    V            V            V            V
+		 *   --------------------------------------------------
+		 *            ^                                  ^
+		 *            |                                  |
+		 *         Period                             Period
+		 *    instructions(Pi)                   instructions(Pi')
+		 *
+		 *            |                                  |
+		 *            \---------------- -----------------/
+		 *                             V
+		 *                 tidq->packet->instr_count
+		 *
+		 * Instrs Sample(n...) are the synthesised samples occurring
+		 * every etm->instructions_sample_period instructions - as
+		 * defined on the perf command line.  Sample(n) is being the
+		 * last sample before the current etm packet, n+1 to n+3
+		 * samples are generated from the current etm packet.
+		 *
+		 * tidq->packet->instr_count represents the number of
+		 * instructions in the current etm packet.
+		 *
+		 * Period instructions (Pi) contains the the number of
+		 * instructions executed after the sample point(n) from the
+		 * previous etm packet.  This will always be less than
+		 * etm->instructions_sample_period.
+		 *
+		 * When generate new samples, it combines with two parts
+		 * instructions, one is the tail of the old packet and another
+		 * is the head of the new coming packet, to generate
+		 * sample(n+1); sample(n+2) and sample(n+3) consume the
+		 * instructions with sample period.  After sample(n+3), the rest
+		 * instructions will be used by later packet and it is assigned
+		 * to tidq->period_instructions for next round calculation.
+		 */
 
 		/*
-		 * Calculate the address of the sampled instruction (-1 as
-		 * sample is reported as though instruction has just been
-		 * executed, but PC has not advanced to next instruction)
+		 * Get the initial offset into the current packet instructions;
+		 * entry conditions ensure that instrs_prev is less than
+		 * etm->instructions_sample_period.
 		 */
-		u64 offset = (instrs_executed - instrs_over - 1);
-		u64 addr = cs_etm__instr_addr(etmq, trace_chan_id,
-					      tidq->packet, offset);
+		u64 offset = etm->instructions_sample_period - instrs_prev;
+		u64 addr;
 
-		ret = cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample(
-			etmq, tidq, addr, etm->instructions_sample_period);
-		if (ret)
-			return ret;
+		while (tidq->period_instructions >=
+				etm->instructions_sample_period) {
+			/*
+			 * Calculate the address of the sampled instruction (-1
+			 * as sample is reported as though instruction has just
+			 * been executed, but PC has not advanced to next
+			 * instruction)
+			 */
+			addr = cs_etm__instr_addr(etmq, trace_chan_id,
+						  tidq->packet, offset - 1);
+			ret = cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample(
+				etmq, tidq, addr,
+				etm->instructions_sample_period);
+			if (ret)
+				return ret;
 
-		/* Carry remaining instructions into next sample period */
-		tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over;
+			offset += etm->instructions_sample_period;
+			tidq->period_instructions -=
+				etm->instructions_sample_period;
+		}
 	}
 
 	if (etm->sample_branches) {
-- 
2.17.1


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>,
	Robert Walker <robert.walker@arm.com>,
	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>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Coresight ML <coresight@lists.linaro.org>
Cc: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Subject: [PATCH v5 3/5] perf cs-etm: Correct synthesizing instruction samples
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 10:18:09 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200219021811.20067-4-leo.yan@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200219021811.20067-1-leo.yan@linaro.org>

When 'etm->instructions_sample_period' is less than
'tidq->period_instructions', the function cs_etm__sample() cannot handle
this case properly with its logic.

Let's see below flow as an example:

- If we set itrace option '--itrace=i4', then function cs_etm__sample()
  has variables with initialized values:

  tidq->period_instructions = 0
  etm->instructions_sample_period = 4

- When the first packet is coming:

  packet->instr_count = 10; the number of instructions executed in this
  packet is 10, thus update period_instructions as below:

  tidq->period_instructions = 0 + 10 = 10
  instrs_over = 10 - 4 = 6
  offset = 10 - 6 - 1 = 3
  tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over = 6

- When the second packet is coming:

  packet->instr_count = 10; in the second pass, assume 10 instructions
  in the trace sample again:

  tidq->period_instructions = 6 + 10 = 16
  instrs_over = 16 - 4 = 12
  offset = 10 - 12 - 1 = -3  -> the negative value
  tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over = 12

So after handle these two packets, there have below issues:

The first issue is that cs_etm__instr_addr() returns the address within
the current trace sample of the instruction related to offset, so the
offset is supposed to be always unsigned value.  But in fact, function
cs_etm__sample() might calculate a negative offset value (in handling
the second packet, the offset is -3) and pass to cs_etm__instr_addr()
with u64 type with a big positive integer.

The second issue is it only synthesizes 2 samples for sample period = 4.
In theory, every packet has 10 instructions so the two packets have
total 20 instructions, 20 instructions should generate 5 samples
(4 x 5 = 20).  This is because cs_etm__sample() only calls once
cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample() to generate instruction sample per
range packet.

This patch fixes the logic in function cs_etm__sample(); the basic
idea for handling coming packet is:

- To synthesize the first instruction sample, it combines the left
  instructions from the previous packet and the head of the new
  packet; then generate continuous samples with sample period;
- At the tail of the new packet, if it has the rest instructions,
  these instructions will be left for the sequential sample.

Suggested-by: Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
---
 tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c b/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c
index b2f31390126a..4b7d6c36ce3c 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c
@@ -1356,9 +1356,12 @@ static int cs_etm__sample(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq,
 	struct cs_etm_auxtrace *etm = etmq->etm;
 	int ret;
 	u8 trace_chan_id = tidq->trace_chan_id;
-	u64 instrs_executed = tidq->packet->instr_count;
+	u64 instrs_prev;
 
-	tidq->period_instructions += instrs_executed;
+	/* Get instructions remainder from previous packet */
+	instrs_prev = tidq->period_instructions;
+
+	tidq->period_instructions += tidq->packet->instr_count;
 
 	/*
 	 * Record a branch when the last instruction in
@@ -1376,26 +1379,76 @@ static int cs_etm__sample(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq,
 		 * TODO: allow period to be defined in cycles and clock time
 		 */
 
-		/* Get number of instructions executed after the sample point */
-		u64 instrs_over = tidq->period_instructions -
-			etm->instructions_sample_period;
+		/*
+		 * Below diagram demonstrates the instruction samples
+		 * generation flows:
+		 *
+		 *    Instrs     Instrs       Instrs       Instrs
+		 *   Sample(n)  Sample(n+1)  Sample(n+2)  Sample(n+3)
+		 *    |            |            |            |
+		 *    V            V            V            V
+		 *   --------------------------------------------------
+		 *            ^                                  ^
+		 *            |                                  |
+		 *         Period                             Period
+		 *    instructions(Pi)                   instructions(Pi')
+		 *
+		 *            |                                  |
+		 *            \---------------- -----------------/
+		 *                             V
+		 *                 tidq->packet->instr_count
+		 *
+		 * Instrs Sample(n...) are the synthesised samples occurring
+		 * every etm->instructions_sample_period instructions - as
+		 * defined on the perf command line.  Sample(n) is being the
+		 * last sample before the current etm packet, n+1 to n+3
+		 * samples are generated from the current etm packet.
+		 *
+		 * tidq->packet->instr_count represents the number of
+		 * instructions in the current etm packet.
+		 *
+		 * Period instructions (Pi) contains the the number of
+		 * instructions executed after the sample point(n) from the
+		 * previous etm packet.  This will always be less than
+		 * etm->instructions_sample_period.
+		 *
+		 * When generate new samples, it combines with two parts
+		 * instructions, one is the tail of the old packet and another
+		 * is the head of the new coming packet, to generate
+		 * sample(n+1); sample(n+2) and sample(n+3) consume the
+		 * instructions with sample period.  After sample(n+3), the rest
+		 * instructions will be used by later packet and it is assigned
+		 * to tidq->period_instructions for next round calculation.
+		 */
 
 		/*
-		 * Calculate the address of the sampled instruction (-1 as
-		 * sample is reported as though instruction has just been
-		 * executed, but PC has not advanced to next instruction)
+		 * Get the initial offset into the current packet instructions;
+		 * entry conditions ensure that instrs_prev is less than
+		 * etm->instructions_sample_period.
 		 */
-		u64 offset = (instrs_executed - instrs_over - 1);
-		u64 addr = cs_etm__instr_addr(etmq, trace_chan_id,
-					      tidq->packet, offset);
+		u64 offset = etm->instructions_sample_period - instrs_prev;
+		u64 addr;
 
-		ret = cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample(
-			etmq, tidq, addr, etm->instructions_sample_period);
-		if (ret)
-			return ret;
+		while (tidq->period_instructions >=
+				etm->instructions_sample_period) {
+			/*
+			 * Calculate the address of the sampled instruction (-1
+			 * as sample is reported as though instruction has just
+			 * been executed, but PC has not advanced to next
+			 * instruction)
+			 */
+			addr = cs_etm__instr_addr(etmq, trace_chan_id,
+						  tidq->packet, offset - 1);
+			ret = cs_etm__synth_instruction_sample(
+				etmq, tidq, addr,
+				etm->instructions_sample_period);
+			if (ret)
+				return ret;
 
-		/* Carry remaining instructions into next sample period */
-		tidq->period_instructions = instrs_over;
+			offset += etm->instructions_sample_period;
+			tidq->period_instructions -=
+				etm->instructions_sample_period;
+		}
 	}
 
 	if (etm->sample_branches) {
-- 
2.17.1


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-02-19  2:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-19  2:18 [PATCH v5 0/5] perf cs-etm: Fix synthesizing instruction samples Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18 ` Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] perf cs-etm: Swap packets for " Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18   ` Leo Yan
2020-03-19 14:10   ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] perf cs-etm: Continuously record last branch Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18   ` Leo Yan
2020-03-19 14:10   ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18 ` Leo Yan [this message]
2020-02-19  2:18   ` [PATCH v5 3/5] perf cs-etm: Correct synthesizing instruction samples Leo Yan
2020-03-19 14:10   ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] perf cs-etm: Optimize copying last branches Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18   ` Leo Yan
2020-03-19 14:10   ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] perf cs-etm: Fix unsigned variable comparison to zero Leo Yan
2020-02-19  2:18   ` Leo Yan
2020-03-19 14:10   ` [tip: perf/core] " tip-bot2 for Leo Yan
2020-03-10  5:43 ` [PATCH v5 0/5] perf cs-etm: Fix synthesizing instruction samples Leo Yan
2020-03-10  5:43   ` Leo Yan
2020-03-10 11:45   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-03-10 11:45     ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-03-10 12:01     ` Leo Yan
2020-03-10 12:01       ` 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=20200219021811.20067-4-leo.yan@linaro.org \
    --to=leo.yan@linaro.org \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=coresight@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
    --cc=mike.leach@linaro.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=robert.walker@arm.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.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.