All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Raphael Gault <raphael.gault@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
	Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	Itaru Kitayama <itaru.kitayama@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] libperf: Add libperf_evsel__mmap()
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 13:24:30 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201021112430.GE2189784@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL_JsqKUK3ajL63dAs4KSPJ2VOJa9HKeiZ0AWNPhe=uvFE8zZA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 12:11:47PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:

SNIP

> > > > >
> > > > > The mmapped read will actually fail and then we fallback here. My main
> > > > > concern though is adding more overhead on a feature that's meant to be
> > > > > low overhead (granted, it's not much). Maybe we could add checks on
> > > > > the mmap that we've opened the event with pid == 0 and cpu == -1 (so
> > > > > only 1 FD)?
> > > >
> > > > but then you limit this just for single fd.. having mmap as xyarray
> > > > would not be that bad and perf_evsel__mmap will call perf_mmap__mmap
> > > > for each defined cpu/thread .. so it depends on user how fast this
> > > > will be - how many maps needs to be created/mmaped
> > >
> > > Given userspace access fails for anything other than the calling
> > > thread and all cpus, how would more than 1 mmap be useful here?
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean by fail in here.. you need mmap for each
> > event fd you want to read from
> 
> Yes, but that's one mmap per event (evsel) which is different than per
> cpu/thread.

right, and you need mmap per fd IIUC

> 
> > in the example below we read stats from all cpus via perf_evsel__read,
> > if we insert this call after perf_evsel__open:
> >
> >   perf_evsel__mmap(cpus, NULL);
> >
> > that maps page for each event, then perf_evsel__read
> > could go through the fast code, no?
> 
> No, because we're not self-monitoring (pid == 0 and cpu == -1). With
> the following change:
> 
> diff --git a/tools/lib/perf/tests/test-evsel.c
> b/tools/lib/perf/tests/test-evsel.c
> index eeca8203d73d..1fca9c121f7c 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/perf/tests/test-evsel.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/perf/tests/test-evsel.c
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ static int test_stat_cpu(void)
>  {
>         struct perf_cpu_map *cpus;
>         struct perf_evsel *evsel;
> +       struct perf_event_mmap_page *pc;
>         struct perf_event_attr attr = {
>                 .type   = PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE,
>                 .config = PERF_COUNT_SW_CPU_CLOCK,
> @@ -32,6 +33,15 @@ static int test_stat_cpu(void)
>         err = perf_evsel__open(evsel, cpus, NULL);
>         __T("failed to open evsel", err == 0);
> 
> +       pc = perf_evsel__mmap(evsel, 0);
> +       __T("failed to mmap evsel", pc);
> +
> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__)
> +       __T("userspace counter access not supported", pc->cap_user_rdpmc);
> +       __T("userspace counter access not enabled", pc->index);
> +       __T("userspace counter width not set", pc->pmc_width >= 32);
> +#endif

I'll need to check, I'm surprised this would depend on the way
you open the event

jirka

> +
>         perf_cpu_map__for_each_cpu(cpu, tmp, cpus) {
>                 struct perf_counts_values counts = { .val = 0 };
> 
> I get:
> 
> - running test-evsel.c...FAILED test-evsel.c:40 userspace counter
> access not supported
> 
> If I set it to pid==0, userspace counter access is also disabled.
> 
> Maybe there is some use for mmap beyond fast path read for
> self-monitoring or what evlist mmap does, but I don't know what that
> would be.
> 
> Note that we could get rid of the mmap API and just do the mmap behind
> the scenes whenever we get the magic setup that works. The main
> downside with that is you can't check if the fast path is enabled or
> not (though we could have a perf_evsel__is_fast_read(evsel, cpu,
> thread) instead).
> 
> Rob
> 


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Raphael Gault <raphael.gault@arm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Itaru Kitayama <itaru.kitayama@gmail.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] libperf: Add libperf_evsel__mmap()
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 13:24:30 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201021112430.GE2189784@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL_JsqKUK3ajL63dAs4KSPJ2VOJa9HKeiZ0AWNPhe=uvFE8zZA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 12:11:47PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:

SNIP

> > > > >
> > > > > The mmapped read will actually fail and then we fallback here. My main
> > > > > concern though is adding more overhead on a feature that's meant to be
> > > > > low overhead (granted, it's not much). Maybe we could add checks on
> > > > > the mmap that we've opened the event with pid == 0 and cpu == -1 (so
> > > > > only 1 FD)?
> > > >
> > > > but then you limit this just for single fd.. having mmap as xyarray
> > > > would not be that bad and perf_evsel__mmap will call perf_mmap__mmap
> > > > for each defined cpu/thread .. so it depends on user how fast this
> > > > will be - how many maps needs to be created/mmaped
> > >
> > > Given userspace access fails for anything other than the calling
> > > thread and all cpus, how would more than 1 mmap be useful here?
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean by fail in here.. you need mmap for each
> > event fd you want to read from
> 
> Yes, but that's one mmap per event (evsel) which is different than per
> cpu/thread.

right, and you need mmap per fd IIUC

> 
> > in the example below we read stats from all cpus via perf_evsel__read,
> > if we insert this call after perf_evsel__open:
> >
> >   perf_evsel__mmap(cpus, NULL);
> >
> > that maps page for each event, then perf_evsel__read
> > could go through the fast code, no?
> 
> No, because we're not self-monitoring (pid == 0 and cpu == -1). With
> the following change:
> 
> diff --git a/tools/lib/perf/tests/test-evsel.c
> b/tools/lib/perf/tests/test-evsel.c
> index eeca8203d73d..1fca9c121f7c 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/perf/tests/test-evsel.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/perf/tests/test-evsel.c
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ static int test_stat_cpu(void)
>  {
>         struct perf_cpu_map *cpus;
>         struct perf_evsel *evsel;
> +       struct perf_event_mmap_page *pc;
>         struct perf_event_attr attr = {
>                 .type   = PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE,
>                 .config = PERF_COUNT_SW_CPU_CLOCK,
> @@ -32,6 +33,15 @@ static int test_stat_cpu(void)
>         err = perf_evsel__open(evsel, cpus, NULL);
>         __T("failed to open evsel", err == 0);
> 
> +       pc = perf_evsel__mmap(evsel, 0);
> +       __T("failed to mmap evsel", pc);
> +
> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__)
> +       __T("userspace counter access not supported", pc->cap_user_rdpmc);
> +       __T("userspace counter access not enabled", pc->index);
> +       __T("userspace counter width not set", pc->pmc_width >= 32);
> +#endif

I'll need to check, I'm surprised this would depend on the way
you open the event

jirka

> +
>         perf_cpu_map__for_each_cpu(cpu, tmp, cpus) {
>                 struct perf_counts_values counts = { .val = 0 };
> 
> I get:
> 
> - running test-evsel.c...FAILED test-evsel.c:40 userspace counter
> access not supported
> 
> If I set it to pid==0, userspace counter access is also disabled.
> 
> Maybe there is some use for mmap beyond fast path read for
> self-monitoring or what evlist mmap does, but I don't know what that
> would be.
> 
> Note that we could get rid of the mmap API and just do the mmap behind
> the scenes whenever we get the magic setup that works. The main
> downside with that is you can't check if the fast path is enabled or
> not (though we could have a perf_evsel__is_fast_read(evsel, cpu,
> thread) instead).
> 
> Rob
> 


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

  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-21 11:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-01 14:01 [PATCH v4 0/9] libperf and arm64 userspace counter access support Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 1/9] arm64: pmu: Add function implementation to update event index in userpage Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 2/9] arm64: perf: Enable pmu counter direct access for perf event on armv8 Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring
2020-11-13 18:06   ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-13 18:06     ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-19 18:35     ` Rob Herring
2020-11-19 18:35       ` Rob Herring
2020-11-19 19:15     ` Will Deacon
2020-11-19 19:15       ` Will Deacon
2020-11-20 20:03       ` Rob Herring
2020-11-20 20:03         ` Rob Herring
2020-11-20 22:08         ` Rob Herring
2020-11-20 22:08           ` Rob Herring
2020-12-02 14:57         ` Rob Herring
2020-12-02 14:57           ` Rob Herring
2021-01-07  0:17           ` Rob Herring
2021-01-07  0:17             ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 3/9] tools/include: Add an initial math64.h Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 4/9] libperf: Add libperf_evsel__mmap() Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring
2020-10-14 11:05   ` Jiri Olsa
2020-10-14 11:05     ` Jiri Olsa
2020-10-16 21:39     ` Rob Herring
2020-10-16 21:39       ` Rob Herring
2020-10-19 20:15       ` Jiri Olsa
2020-10-19 20:15         ` Jiri Olsa
2020-10-20 14:38         ` Rob Herring
2020-10-20 14:38           ` Rob Herring
2020-10-20 15:35           ` Jiri Olsa
2020-10-20 15:35             ` Jiri Olsa
2020-10-20 17:11             ` Rob Herring
2020-10-20 17:11               ` Rob Herring
2020-10-21 11:24               ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2020-10-21 11:24                 ` Jiri Olsa
2020-11-05 16:19                 ` Rob Herring
2020-11-05 16:19                   ` Rob Herring
2020-11-05 22:41                   ` Jiri Olsa
2020-11-05 22:41                     ` Jiri Olsa
2020-11-06 21:56                     ` Rob Herring
2020-11-06 21:56                       ` Rob Herring
2020-11-11 12:00                       ` Jiri Olsa
2020-11-11 12:00                         ` Jiri Olsa
2020-11-11 14:50                         ` Rob Herring
2020-11-11 14:50                           ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 5/9] libperf: tests: Add support for verbose printing Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 6/9] libperf: Add support for user space counter access Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 7/9] libperf: Add arm64 support to perf_mmap__read_self() Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 8/9] perf: arm64: Add test for userspace counter access on heterogeneous systems Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01 ` [PATCH v4 9/9] Documentation: arm64: Document PMU counters access from userspace Rob Herring
2020-10-01 14:01   ` Rob Herring

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=20201021112430.GE2189784@krava \
    --to=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=itaru.kitayama@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=raphael.gault@arm.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] libperf: Add libperf_evsel__mmap()' \
    /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

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.