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, 11 Nov 2020 13:00:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201111120056.GJ387652@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL_JsqJzeCebq4VP+xBtfh=fbomvaJoVMp35AQQDGTYD-fRWgw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 03:56:11PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:41 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 10:19:24AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> >
> > SNIP
> >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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
> > >
> > > Any more thoughts on this?
> >
> > sry I got stuck with other stuff.. I tried your change
> > and pc->cap_user_rdpmc is 0 because the test creates
> > software event, which does not support that
> 
> Sigh, yes, of course.
> 
> > when I change that to:
> >
> >         .type   = PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE,
> >         .config = PERF_COUNT_HW_CPU_CYCLES,
> >
> > I don't see any of those warning you added
> 
> So I've now implemented the per fd mmap. It seems to run and get some
> data, but for the above case the counts don't look right.
> 
> cpu0: count = 0x10883, ena = 0xbf42, run = 0xbf42
> cpu1: count = 0x1bc65, ena = 0xa278, run = 0xa278
> cpu2: count = 0x1fab2, ena = 0x91ea, run = 0x91ea
> cpu3: count = 0x23d61, ena = 0x81ac, run = 0x81ac
> cpu4: count = 0x2936a, ena = 0x7149, run = 0x7149
> cpu5: count = 0x2cd4e, ena = 0x634f, run = 0x634f
> cpu6: count = 0x3139f, ena = 0x53e7, run = 0x53e7
> cpu7: count = 0x35350, ena = 0x4690, run = 0x4690
> 
> For comparison, this is what I get using the slow path read():
> cpu0: count = 0x1c40, ena = 0x188b5, run = 0x188b5
> cpu1: count = 0x18e0, ena = 0x1b8f4, run = 0x1b8f4
> cpu2: count = 0x745e, ena = 0x1ab9e, run = 0x1ab9e
> cpu3: count = 0x2416, ena = 0x1a280, run = 0x1a280
> cpu4: count = 0x19c7, ena = 0x19b00, run = 0x19b00
> cpu5: count = 0x1737, ena = 0x19262, run = 0x19262
> cpu6: count = 0x11d0e, ena = 0x18944, run = 0x18944
> cpu7: count = 0x20dbe, ena = 0x181f4, run = 0x181f4

hum, could you please send/push changes with that test?
I can try it and check

jirka

> 
> The difference is we get a sequentially increasing count rather than 1
> random CPU (the one running the test) with a much higher count. That
> seems to me we're just reading the count for the calling process, not
> each CPU.
> 
> For this to work correctly, cap_user_rdpmc would have to be set only
> for the CPU's mmap that matches the calling process's CPU. I'm not
> sure whether that can be done. Even if it can, is it really worth
> doing so? You're accelerating reading an event on 1 out of N CPUs. And
> what do we do on every kernel up til now this won't work on? Another
> cap bit?
> 
> Rob
> 
> P.S. I did find one bug with all this. The shifts by pmc_width in the
> read seq need to be a signed count. This test happens to have raw
> counter values starting at 2^47.
> 


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, 11 Nov 2020 13:00:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201111120056.GJ387652@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL_JsqJzeCebq4VP+xBtfh=fbomvaJoVMp35AQQDGTYD-fRWgw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 03:56:11PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 4:41 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 10:19:24AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> >
> > SNIP
> >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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
> > >
> > > Any more thoughts on this?
> >
> > sry I got stuck with other stuff.. I tried your change
> > and pc->cap_user_rdpmc is 0 because the test creates
> > software event, which does not support that
> 
> Sigh, yes, of course.
> 
> > when I change that to:
> >
> >         .type   = PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE,
> >         .config = PERF_COUNT_HW_CPU_CYCLES,
> >
> > I don't see any of those warning you added
> 
> So I've now implemented the per fd mmap. It seems to run and get some
> data, but for the above case the counts don't look right.
> 
> cpu0: count = 0x10883, ena = 0xbf42, run = 0xbf42
> cpu1: count = 0x1bc65, ena = 0xa278, run = 0xa278
> cpu2: count = 0x1fab2, ena = 0x91ea, run = 0x91ea
> cpu3: count = 0x23d61, ena = 0x81ac, run = 0x81ac
> cpu4: count = 0x2936a, ena = 0x7149, run = 0x7149
> cpu5: count = 0x2cd4e, ena = 0x634f, run = 0x634f
> cpu6: count = 0x3139f, ena = 0x53e7, run = 0x53e7
> cpu7: count = 0x35350, ena = 0x4690, run = 0x4690
> 
> For comparison, this is what I get using the slow path read():
> cpu0: count = 0x1c40, ena = 0x188b5, run = 0x188b5
> cpu1: count = 0x18e0, ena = 0x1b8f4, run = 0x1b8f4
> cpu2: count = 0x745e, ena = 0x1ab9e, run = 0x1ab9e
> cpu3: count = 0x2416, ena = 0x1a280, run = 0x1a280
> cpu4: count = 0x19c7, ena = 0x19b00, run = 0x19b00
> cpu5: count = 0x1737, ena = 0x19262, run = 0x19262
> cpu6: count = 0x11d0e, ena = 0x18944, run = 0x18944
> cpu7: count = 0x20dbe, ena = 0x181f4, run = 0x181f4

hum, could you please send/push changes with that test?
I can try it and check

jirka

> 
> The difference is we get a sequentially increasing count rather than 1
> random CPU (the one running the test) with a much higher count. That
> seems to me we're just reading the count for the calling process, not
> each CPU.
> 
> For this to work correctly, cap_user_rdpmc would have to be set only
> for the CPU's mmap that matches the calling process's CPU. I'm not
> sure whether that can be done. Even if it can, is it really worth
> doing so? You're accelerating reading an event on 1 out of N CPUs. And
> what do we do on every kernel up til now this won't work on? Another
> cap bit?
> 
> Rob
> 
> P.S. I did find one bug with all this. The shifts by pmc_width in the
> read seq need to be a signed count. This test happens to have raw
> counter values starting at 2^47.
> 


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

  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-11 12:01 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
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 [this message]
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=20201111120056.GJ387652@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.