From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Peter Ziljstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Kajol Jain <kjain@linux.ibm.com>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 bpf-next 0/3] bpf: introduce bpf_get_branch_snapshot
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 15:54:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEf4Bzb-mbZp_iEd9-Z6euMk5eYjEFJwv1QpSQx_sqSQ37xcWw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210902165706.2812867-1-songliubraving@fb.com>
On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 9:58 AM Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com> wrote:
>
> Changes v4 => v5
> 1. Modify perf_snapshot_branch_stack_t to save some memcpy. (Andrii)
> 2. Minor fixes in selftests. (Andrii)
>
> Changes v3 => v4:
> 1. Do not reshuffle intel_pmu_disable_all(). Use some inline to save LBR
> entries. (Peter)
> 2. Move static_call(perf_snapshot_branch_stack) to the helper. (Alexei)
> 3. Add argument flags to bpf_get_branch_snapshot. (Andrii)
> 4. Make MAX_BRANCH_SNAPSHOT an enum (Andrii). And rename it as
> PERF_MAX_BRANCH_SNAPSHOT
> 5. Make bpf_get_branch_snapshot similar to bpf_read_branch_records.
> (Andrii)
> 6. Move the test target function to bpf_testmod. Updated kallsyms_find_next
> to work properly with modules. (Andrii)
>
> Changes v2 => v3:
> 1. Fix the use of static_call. (Peter)
> 2. Limit the use to perfmon version >= 2. (Peter)
> 3. Modify intel_pmu_snapshot_branch_stack() to use intel_pmu_disable_all
> and intel_pmu_enable_all().
>
> Changes v1 => v2:
> 1. Rename the helper as bpf_get_branch_snapshot;
> 2. Fix/simplify the use of static_call;
> 3. Instead of percpu variables, let intel_pmu_snapshot_branch_stack output
> branch records to an output argument of type perf_branch_snapshot.
>
> Branch stack can be very useful in understanding software events. For
> example, when a long function, e.g. sys_perf_event_open, returns an errno,
> it is not obvious why the function failed. Branch stack could provide very
> helpful information in this type of scenarios.
>
> This set adds support to read branch stack with a new BPF helper
> bpf_get_branch_trace(). Currently, this is only supported in Intel systems.
> It is also possible to support the same feaure for PowerPC.
>
> The hardware that records the branch stace is not stopped automatically on
> software events. Therefore, it is necessary to stop it in software soon.
> Otherwise, the hardware buffers/registers will be flushed. One of the key
> design consideration in this set is to minimize the number of branch record
> entries between the event triggers and the hardware recorder is stopped.
> Based on this goal, current design is different from the discussions in
> original RFC [1]:
> 1) Static call is used when supported, to save function pointer
> dereference;
> 2) intel_pmu_lbr_disable_all is used instead of perf_pmu_disable(),
> because the latter uses about 10 entries before stopping LBR.
>
> With current code, on Intel CPU, LBR is stopped after 10 branch entries
> after fexit triggers:
>
> ID: 0 from intel_pmu_lbr_disable_all+58 to intel_pmu_lbr_disable_all+93
> ID: 1 from intel_pmu_lbr_disable_all+54 to intel_pmu_lbr_disable_all+58
> ID: 2 from intel_pmu_snapshot_branch_stack+88 to intel_pmu_lbr_disable_all+0
> ID: 3 from bpf_get_branch_snapshot+77 to intel_pmu_snapshot_branch_stack+0
> ID: 4 from __brk_limit+478052814 to bpf_get_branch_snapshot+0
> ID: 5 from __brk_limit+478036039 to __brk_limit+478052760
> ID: 6 from __bpf_prog_enter+34 to __brk_limit+478036027
> ID: 7 from migrate_disable+60 to __bpf_prog_enter+9
> ID: 8 from __bpf_prog_enter+4 to migrate_disable+0
> ID: 9 from __brk_limit+478036022 to __bpf_prog_enter+0
> ID: 10 from bpf_testmod_loop_test+22 to __brk_limit+478036003
> ID: 11 from bpf_testmod_loop_test+20 to bpf_testmod_loop_test+13
> ID: 12 from bpf_testmod_loop_test+20 to bpf_testmod_loop_test+13
> ID: 13 from bpf_testmod_loop_test+20 to bpf_testmod_loop_test+13
> ...
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210818012937.2522409-1-songliubraving@fb.com/
>
> Song Liu (3):
> perf: enable branch record for software events
> bpf: introduce helper bpf_get_branch_snapshot
> selftests/bpf: add test for bpf_get_branch_snapshot
>
Besides the BPF helper comment nit, looks good to me. For the series:
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> arch/x86/events/intel/core.c | 26 ++++-
> arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 8 --
> arch/x86/events/perf_event.h | 10 +-
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 23 ++++
> include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 22 ++++
> kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 3 +-
> kernel/events/core.c | 2 +
> kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 33 ++++++
> tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 22 ++++
> .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 19 +++-
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/core_reloc.c | 14 +--
> .../bpf/prog_tests/get_branch_snapshot.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/module_attach.c | 39 -------
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/get_branch_snapshot.c | 40 +++++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c | 39 +++++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h | 2 +
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/trace_helpers.c | 37 +++++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/trace_helpers.h | 5 +
> 18 files changed, 378 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_branch_snapshot.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_branch_snapshot.c
>
> --
> 2.30.2
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-02 22:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-02 16:57 [PATCH v5 bpf-next 0/3] bpf: introduce bpf_get_branch_snapshot Song Liu
2021-09-02 16:57 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 1/3] perf: enable branch record for software events Song Liu
2021-09-02 20:49 ` John Fastabend
2021-09-03 8:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-03 16:50 ` Song Liu
2021-09-07 18:59 ` Song Liu
2021-09-07 20:50 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-03 8:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-03 16:45 ` Song Liu
2021-09-04 10:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-02 16:57 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 2/3] bpf: introduce helper bpf_get_branch_snapshot Song Liu
2021-09-02 20:56 ` John Fastabend
2021-09-02 22:04 ` Song Liu
2021-09-02 22:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-02 23:03 ` Song Liu
2021-09-02 23:05 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-03 1:03 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-09-03 8:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-03 16:58 ` Song Liu
2021-09-03 8:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-03 17:06 ` Song Liu
2021-09-03 17:10 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-04 10:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-04 10:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-02 16:57 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: add test for bpf_get_branch_snapshot Song Liu
2021-09-02 21:05 ` John Fastabend
2021-09-02 22:54 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
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=CAEf4Bzb-mbZp_iEd9-Z6euMk5eYjEFJwv1QpSQx_sqSQ37xcWw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=kjain@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=songliubraving@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).