From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
songliubraving@fb.com, yhs@fb.com, andriin@fb.com
Cc: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/3] bpf: Add bpf_perf_prog_read_branches() helper
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 21:39:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5e293189e298d_1bc42ab516c865b8a1@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200122202220.21335-2-dxu@dxuuu.xyz>
Daniel Xu wrote:
> Branch records are a CPU feature that can be configured to record
> certain branches that are taken during code execution. This data is
> particularly interesting for profile guided optimizations. perf has had
> branch record support for a while but the data collection can be a bit
> coarse grained.
>
> We (Facebook) have seen in experiments that associating metadata with
> branch records can improve results (after postprocessing). We generally
> use bpf_probe_read_*() to get metadata out of userspace. That's why bpf
> support for branch records is useful.
>
> Aside from this particular use case, having branch data available to bpf
> progs can be useful to get stack traces out of userspace applications
> that omit frame pointers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz>
> ---
> include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 13 ++++++++++++-
> kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> index 033d90a2282d..7350c5be6158 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -2885,6 +2885,16 @@ union bpf_attr {
> * **-EPERM** if no permission to send the *sig*.
> *
> * **-EAGAIN** if bpf program can try again.
> + *
> + * int bpf_perf_prog_read_branches(struct bpf_perf_event_data *ctx, void *buf, u32 buf_size)
> + * Description
> + * For en eBPF program attached to a perf event, retrieve the
> + * branch records (struct perf_branch_entry) associated to *ctx*
> + * and store it in the buffer pointed by *buf* up to size
> + * *buf_size* bytes.
It seems extra bytes in buf will be cleared. The number of bytes
copied is returned so I don't see any reason to clear the extra bytes I would
just let the BPF program do this if they care. But it should be noted in
the description at least.
> + * Return
> + * On success, number of bytes written to *buf*. On error, a
> + * negative value.
> */
> #define __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER(FN) \
> FN(unspec), \
> @@ -3004,7 +3014,8 @@ union bpf_attr {
> FN(probe_read_user_str), \
> FN(probe_read_kernel_str), \
> FN(tcp_send_ack), \
> - FN(send_signal_thread),
> + FN(send_signal_thread), \
> + FN(perf_prog_read_branches),
>
> /* integer value in 'imm' field of BPF_CALL instruction selects which helper
> * function eBPF program intends to call
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> index 19e793aa441a..24c51272a1f7 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> @@ -1028,6 +1028,35 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_perf_prog_read_value_proto = {
> .arg3_type = ARG_CONST_SIZE,
> };
>
> +BPF_CALL_3(bpf_perf_prog_read_branches, struct bpf_perf_event_data_kern *, ctx,
> + void *, buf, u32, size)
> +{
> + struct perf_branch_stack *br_stack = ctx->data->br_stack;
> + u32 to_copy = 0, to_clear = size;
> + int err = -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (unlikely(!br_stack))
> + goto clear;
> +
> + to_copy = min_t(u32, br_stack->nr * sizeof(struct perf_branch_entry), size);
> + to_clear -= to_copy;
> +
> + memcpy(buf, br_stack->entries, to_copy);
> + err = to_copy;
> +clear:
> + memset(buf + to_copy, 0, to_clear);
Here, why do this at all? If the user cares they can clear the bytes
directly from the BPF program. I suspect its probably going to be
wasted work in most cases. If its needed for some reason provide
a comment with it.
> + return err;
> +}
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-23 5:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-22 20:22 [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/3] Add bpf_perf_prog_read_branches() helper Daniel Xu
2020-01-22 20:22 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/3] bpf: " Daniel Xu
2020-01-23 5:39 ` John Fastabend [this message]
2020-01-23 20:09 ` Daniel Xu
2020-01-23 22:23 ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-01-23 22:30 ` Daniel Xu
2020-01-23 22:41 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-01-23 23:09 ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-01-23 22:44 ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-01-23 23:07 ` Martin Lau
2020-01-23 23:27 ` Daniel Xu
2020-01-22 20:22 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/3] tools/bpf: Sync uapi header bpf.h Daniel Xu
2020-01-22 20:22 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: add bpf_perf_prog_read_branches() selftest Daniel Xu
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=5e293189e298d_1bc42ab516c865b8a1@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch \
--to=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=andriin@fb.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dxu@dxuuu.xyz \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=yhs@fb.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).