From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752788Ab3EPPgP (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 May 2013 11:36:15 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f179.google.com ([209.85.214.179]:41249 "EHLO mail-ob0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751888Ab3EPPgL (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 May 2013 11:36:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20130516111634.GA15314@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20130503121122.931661809@chello.nl> <20130503121256.230745028@chello.nl> <20130516090916.GF19669@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> <8578.1368699317@ale.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20130516111634.GA15314@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:36:11 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] perf, x86, lbr: Demand proper privileges for PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_KERNEL From: Stephane Eranian To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Michael Neuling , Ingo Molnar , LKML , "ak@linux.intel.com" , Michael Ellerman , "benh@kernel.crashing.org" , Linux PPC dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:15:17PM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote: >> Peter, >> >> BTW PowerPC also has the ability to filter on conditional branches. Any >> chance we could add something like the follow to perf also? >> > > I don't see an immediate problem with that except that we on x86 need to > implement that in the software filter. Stephane do you see any > fundamental issue with that? > On X86, the LBR cannot filter on conditional in HW. Thus as Peter said, it would have to be done in SW. I did not add that because I think those branches are not necessarily useful for tools. >> >> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h >> index fb104e5..891c769 100644 >> --- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h >> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h >> @@ -157,8 +157,9 @@ enum perf_branch_sample_type { >> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_CALL = 1U << 4, /* any call branch */ >> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_RETURN = 1U << 5, /* any return branch */ >> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_IND_CALL = 1U << 6, /* indirect calls */ >> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_CONDITIONAL = 1U << 7, /* conditional branches */ >> >> - PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX = 1U << 7, /* non-ABI */ >> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX = 1U << 8, /* non-ABI */ >> }; >> >> #define PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PLM_ALL \ >> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c >> index cdf58ec..5b0b89d 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c >> @@ -676,6 +676,7 @@ static const struct branch_mode branch_modes[] = { >> BRANCH_OPT("any_call", PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_CALL), >> BRANCH_OPT("any_ret", PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_RETURN), >> BRANCH_OPT("ind_call", PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_IND_CALL), >> + BRANCH_OPT("cnd", PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_CONDITIONAL), >> BRANCH_END >> }; >> From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x235.google.com (mail-ob0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 610CE2C00E1 for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 01:36:14 +1000 (EST) Received: by mail-ob0-f181.google.com with SMTP id dn14so3548757obc.26 for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 08:36:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20130516111634.GA15314@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20130503121122.931661809@chello.nl> <20130503121256.230745028@chello.nl> <20130516090916.GF19669@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> <8578.1368699317@ale.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20130516111634.GA15314@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:36:11 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] perf, x86, lbr: Demand proper privileges for PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_KERNEL From: Stephane Eranian To: Peter Zijlstra Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Michael Neuling , "ak@linux.intel.com" , LKML , Linux PPC dev , Ingo Molnar List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:15:17PM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote: >> Peter, >> >> BTW PowerPC also has the ability to filter on conditional branches. Any >> chance we could add something like the follow to perf also? >> > > I don't see an immediate problem with that except that we on x86 need to > implement that in the software filter. Stephane do you see any > fundamental issue with that? > On X86, the LBR cannot filter on conditional in HW. Thus as Peter said, it would have to be done in SW. I did not add that because I think those branches are not necessarily useful for tools. >> >> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h >> index fb104e5..891c769 100644 >> --- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h >> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h >> @@ -157,8 +157,9 @@ enum perf_branch_sample_type { >> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_CALL = 1U << 4, /* any call branch */ >> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_RETURN = 1U << 5, /* any return branch */ >> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_IND_CALL = 1U << 6, /* indirect calls */ >> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_CONDITIONAL = 1U << 7, /* conditional branches */ >> >> - PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX = 1U << 7, /* non-ABI */ >> + PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_MAX = 1U << 8, /* non-ABI */ >> }; >> >> #define PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PLM_ALL \ >> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c >> index cdf58ec..5b0b89d 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c >> @@ -676,6 +676,7 @@ static const struct branch_mode branch_modes[] = { >> BRANCH_OPT("any_call", PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_CALL), >> BRANCH_OPT("any_ret", PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_RETURN), >> BRANCH_OPT("ind_call", PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_IND_CALL), >> + BRANCH_OPT("cnd", PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_CONDITIONAL), >> BRANCH_END >> }; >>