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 5B559C00140 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 15:20:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237569AbiHLPU2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:20:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43086 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237666AbiHLPUX (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:20:23 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62a.google.com (mail-ej1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 166D1B16 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 08:20:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id kb8so2583377ejc.4 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 08:20:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc; bh=rtQ2oj7YSn/gbh3jMKvBJQDThusJmtQ8+ZqWZmJSXcA=; b=aI3Lgtkys5nGO/IzF9hKpacnqblRSZ8BULX6iKtqVwXw96On7EY67hsUqnsnARm10O Qm+9INAzLurLw622ZfF469LHTkzda70y2lZJcjwLQnhd414+DYtIzAj1q6TreKowJVpv 0eTf8DmRj6TinmoH6LyrFol8JN/VltD0DHeoQe+gCQKB/Us4iaVKIARt4CPPJYLUlgD+ IboMJnrrITy4Fjyn73tjxDTO6nFsDz/Hvk9Yz8h9Hx3QbNZMX9fsLmKPYTZTKQgb039i 0p44nD+lDO1yCaJrdRGjODCmxpaRookG4rUw/d7+ZzUTNop02aT2A46uF/eEVRlXkFBc s+Tg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=rtQ2oj7YSn/gbh3jMKvBJQDThusJmtQ8+ZqWZmJSXcA=; b=w/HAIgUsr8rozp9Z/TZGL2BdCPztAv//4wp2eLoXxAjgitt4r+HeanDqxJo4Bidw3z IwO28HFBpc0ub6XwYAw4pDwttw0/U8gOoAe2sy4EAghzmyfXmzJv41mCtwyKFMFhGIXv Y71UVWVGfj6sp56uWf+Mx3+9zbPAVg2ea8NFd3Qwfo2T+kMegM6k4CX/N0Sw92cZq9bp anE/yz7rq2V15n53V1I2cKMS9YyKdAfOMutM6eGt7yIets1dGsF0iWANcCoMUIvhK0MM NNn1w7w5dOXWaqTtBfrt0jgBHm8lQ74dY/DdKjpog7zpdKn7ED4eAQPLjiZmRumd79tX kwTQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0j4XRyFkZxhCd5z3BhTgD4h1w13MPGE9QfwwOdTW6AapLj1tTU tS3bmVRrZGC2sAHeXUiaMd1X8A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR63EJQsWA71K1V6fzcjfi7FR6X9gMKdVMyzigLyDpWASNPHDzfJrpwYA4KNxpl2dwBuNQXp+Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:75e7:b0:730:bc2f:b26a with SMTP id jz7-20020a17090775e700b00730bc2fb26amr2964073ejc.738.1660317619472; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 08:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leoy-huanghe ([104.245.96.132]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a5-20020a17090680c500b00734b2169222sm873749ejx.186.2022.08.12.08.20.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 12 Aug 2022 08:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 23:20:10 +0800 From: Leo Yan To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Mark Rutland , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Ian Rogers , John Garry , Will Deacon , James Clark , German Gomez , Ali Saidi , Joe Mario , Adam Li , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/17] perf c2c: Support data source and display for Arm64 Message-ID: <20220812152010.GA74978@leoy-huanghe> References: <20220604042820.2270916-1-leo.yan@linaro.org> <20220811064122.GA860078@leoy-huanghe.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 09:43:07AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: [...] > > One question: should I later continue to upstream the first patch for > > syncing the kernel header perf_event.h after Peter.Z comes back? > > yes, and we may have to backtrack and find some other way to implement > this if he is opposed, as he in the past didn't like > perf_event_attr.type namespace being used by userspace only records such > as PERF_RECORD_FINISHED_ROUND, PERF_RECORD_COMPRESSED, etc. > > In this case its different, I think its ok as we already have > PERF_MEM_SNOOPX_FWD and PERF_MEM_SNOOPX_PEER probably will be emitted by > the some of the architectures, from the kernel, right? Yes, as I know x86 generates memory samples from kernel, and SNOOPX_PEER can be a useful snooping flag for other archs. As a last resort if SNOOPX_PEER is rejected, we can rollback to use existed flag (like reusing PERF_MEM_SNOOPX_FWD), though this would be ambiguous for expressing the memory operations on Arm64. Thanks, Leo 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 bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 920DBC00140 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 15:21:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=hPrHTKIqV/gZlgux/AklX8WLiOXV9uSqMJVmrpBrIks=; b=jlgqk+DHpghlP0 iBiHFSj1wwGv0OATwM5cQUYPbyno8D/Uu0w4vCWQky2ePlJVwb2hNkOfuP/fD2dpvheqoWOpdrxum RY666bldlpKg6Jam5iFB+eOVopWIuLevCbAd9LW/ksbuXwmDJ8obvlnWA37lDyoKDYOEist9w++T9 TfC3Oj1z3u2MnU6zeWbktjbeAV/ijxDBq4RhGJKI2z+KboeApdjeFDmOYUjtvR/one1iYmCEhcknv gVf7KQNr8POaLrhLpZ2g6MmRaRjy8f2OlvBt9Ht6qJG4A9dHPjXxOpeTuQomOppMJ1gnsY64ZT5/6 PYe74+2Y4XHFpLa8KUAw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1oMWSY-009zZX-1l; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 15:20:26 +0000 Received: from mail-ej1-x635.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::635]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1oMWSV-009zUM-38 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 15:20:24 +0000 Received: by mail-ej1-x635.google.com with SMTP id dc19so2547610ejb.12 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 08:20:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc; bh=rtQ2oj7YSn/gbh3jMKvBJQDThusJmtQ8+ZqWZmJSXcA=; b=aI3Lgtkys5nGO/IzF9hKpacnqblRSZ8BULX6iKtqVwXw96On7EY67hsUqnsnARm10O Qm+9INAzLurLw622ZfF469LHTkzda70y2lZJcjwLQnhd414+DYtIzAj1q6TreKowJVpv 0eTf8DmRj6TinmoH6LyrFol8JN/VltD0DHeoQe+gCQKB/Us4iaVKIARt4CPPJYLUlgD+ IboMJnrrITy4Fjyn73tjxDTO6nFsDz/Hvk9Yz8h9Hx3QbNZMX9fsLmKPYTZTKQgb039i 0p44nD+lDO1yCaJrdRGjODCmxpaRookG4rUw/d7+ZzUTNop02aT2A46uF/eEVRlXkFBc s+Tg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=rtQ2oj7YSn/gbh3jMKvBJQDThusJmtQ8+ZqWZmJSXcA=; b=W2CJf8hcunYl1Dgm2bxf31sOvRpPmadkOA67xK5WCUGTOceTHlyRwsdiasdpJGDOZx cPG4aCgx7bTj3KOWTVzUmySukOSmfn1AuMYrPB7nuNTX22XDUJyLOMHrldNheo97PQl8 IwrgI8xEvAbJ9IKVbI98NCf29anGq59nnefz60INmMMQzv+S3rcqZ2spUkO7wdF8AGBu VwpOv/648nzrJWjn/5MP5bH9IXAZVg1eRIA8TqIlx7ulvvMOZi+PAAPzsWvSD6wH097y PdNbXCDqWj1cY+72u77LLU3uZpqR6viMSLRCqVdKxnfdlCj2NnwNsKEp8Wx+POJeQM3T Znvg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo3qi8EEz2g65/QwdUBjs6p9qkCYfTIaE1fqexLoiLYf8OE4i6iZ DXFsyVoXdLP6ePcvWVSBB6La7A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR63EJQsWA71K1V6fzcjfi7FR6X9gMKdVMyzigLyDpWASNPHDzfJrpwYA4KNxpl2dwBuNQXp+Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:75e7:b0:730:bc2f:b26a with SMTP id jz7-20020a17090775e700b00730bc2fb26amr2964073ejc.738.1660317619472; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 08:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leoy-huanghe ([104.245.96.132]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a5-20020a17090680c500b00734b2169222sm873749ejx.186.2022.08.12.08.20.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 12 Aug 2022 08:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 23:20:10 +0800 From: Leo Yan To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Mark Rutland , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Ian Rogers , John Garry , Will Deacon , James Clark , German Gomez , Ali Saidi , Joe Mario , Adam Li , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/17] perf c2c: Support data source and display for Arm64 Message-ID: <20220812152010.GA74978@leoy-huanghe> References: <20220604042820.2270916-1-leo.yan@linaro.org> <20220811064122.GA860078@leoy-huanghe.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220812_082023_183064_1359555B X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 16.38 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 09:43:07AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: [...] > > One question: should I later continue to upstream the first patch for > > syncing the kernel header perf_event.h after Peter.Z comes back? > > yes, and we may have to backtrack and find some other way to implement > this if he is opposed, as he in the past didn't like > perf_event_attr.type namespace being used by userspace only records such > as PERF_RECORD_FINISHED_ROUND, PERF_RECORD_COMPRESSED, etc. > > In this case its different, I think its ok as we already have > PERF_MEM_SNOOPX_FWD and PERF_MEM_SNOOPX_PEER probably will be emitted by > the some of the architectures, from the kernel, right? Yes, as I know x86 generates memory samples from kernel, and SNOOPX_PEER can be a useful snooping flag for other archs. As a last resort if SNOOPX_PEER is rejected, we can rollback to use existed flag (like reusing PERF_MEM_SNOOPX_FWD), though this would be ambiguous for expressing the memory operations on Arm64. Thanks, Leo _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel