[PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Namhyung Kim]

The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
CO-RE technique.

Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
check the field name in the cgroup struct.

Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
---
Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!

 tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
index 488bd398f01d..4fe61043de04 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
@@ -43,12 +43,39 @@ struct {
 	__uint(value_size, sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value));
 } cgrp_readings SEC(".maps");
 
+/* new kernel cgroup definition */
+struct cgroup___new {
+	int level;
+	struct cgroup *ancestors[];
+} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
+
+/* old kernel cgroup definition */
+struct cgroup___old {
+	int level;
+	u64 ancestor_ids[];
+} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
+
 const volatile __u32 num_events = 1;
 const volatile __u32 num_cpus = 1;
 
 int enabled = 0;
 int use_cgroup_v2 = 0;
 
+static inline __u64 get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(struct cgroup *cgrp, int level)
+{
+	/* recast pointer to capture new type for compiler */
+	struct cgroup___new *cgrp_new = (void *)cgrp;
+
+	if (bpf_core_field_exists(cgrp_new->ancestors)) {
+		return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_new, ancestors[level], kn, id);
+	} else {
+		/* recast pointer to capture old type for compiler */
+		struct cgroup___old *cgrp_old = (void *)cgrp;
+
+		return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_old, ancestor_ids[level]);
+	}
+}
+
 static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
 {
 	struct task_struct *p = (void *)bpf_get_current_task();
@@ -70,7 +97,7 @@ static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
 			break;
 
 		// convert cgroup-id to a map index
-		cgrp_id = BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp, ancestors[i], kn, id);
+		cgrp_id = get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(cgrp, i);
 		elem = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&cgrp_idx, &cgrp_id);
 		if (!elem)
 			continue;
-- 
2.37.3.968.ga6b4b080e4-goog

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Tejun Heo]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> CO-RE technique.
> 
> Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> ---
> Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!

FWIW, looks fine to me and I'd be happy to route this through the cgroup
tree once it gets acked.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Namhyung Kim]

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 8:22 PM Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> > CO-RE technique.
> >
> > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> > on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> > perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
>
> FWIW, looks fine to me and I'd be happy to route this through the cgroup
> tree once it gets acked.

Thanks Tejun!

Can any perf + bpf folks take a look?

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Jiri Olsa]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> CO-RE technique.
> 
> Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> ---
> Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!

could you please paste the cgroup tree link?

thanks,
jirka

> 
>  tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> index 488bd398f01d..4fe61043de04 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> @@ -43,12 +43,39 @@ struct {
>  	__uint(value_size, sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value));
>  } cgrp_readings SEC(".maps");
>  
> +/* new kernel cgroup definition */
> +struct cgroup___new {
> +	int level;
> +	struct cgroup *ancestors[];
> +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> +
> +/* old kernel cgroup definition */
> +struct cgroup___old {
> +	int level;
> +	u64 ancestor_ids[];
> +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> +
>  const volatile __u32 num_events = 1;
>  const volatile __u32 num_cpus = 1;
>  
>  int enabled = 0;
>  int use_cgroup_v2 = 0;
>  
> +static inline __u64 get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(struct cgroup *cgrp, int level)
> +{
> +	/* recast pointer to capture new type for compiler */
> +	struct cgroup___new *cgrp_new = (void *)cgrp;
> +
> +	if (bpf_core_field_exists(cgrp_new->ancestors)) {
> +		return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_new, ancestors[level], kn, id);
> +	} else {
> +		/* recast pointer to capture old type for compiler */
> +		struct cgroup___old *cgrp_old = (void *)cgrp;
> +
> +		return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_old, ancestor_ids[level]);
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
>  {
>  	struct task_struct *p = (void *)bpf_get_current_task();
> @@ -70,7 +97,7 @@ static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
>  			break;
>  
>  		// convert cgroup-id to a map index
> -		cgrp_id = BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp, ancestors[i], kn, id);
> +		cgrp_id = get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(cgrp, i);
>  		elem = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&cgrp_idx, &cgrp_id);
>  		if (!elem)
>  			continue;
> -- 
> 2.37.3.968.ga6b4b080e4-goog
> 

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Namhyung Kim]

Hi Jiri,

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 2:44 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> > CO-RE technique.
> >
> > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> > on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> > perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
>
> could you please paste the cgroup tree link?

Do you mean this?

  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/cgroup.git

Thanks,.
Namhyung

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

On September 30, 2022 6:56:40 PM GMT-03:00, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
>Hi Jiri,
>
>On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 2:44 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
>> > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
>> > CO-RE technique.
>> >
>> > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
>> > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
>> > ---
>> > Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
>> > on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
>> > perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
>>
>> could you please paste the cgroup tree link?
>
>Do you mean this?
>
>  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/cgroup.git
>


Which branch and cset in that tree does you perf skel depends on?

- Arnaldo 
>Thanks,.
>Namhyung

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Namhyung Kim]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 3:00 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<arnaldo.melo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On September 30, 2022 6:56:40 PM GMT-03:00, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
> >Hi Jiri,
> >
> >On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 2:44 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> >> > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> >> > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> >> > CO-RE technique.
> >> >
> >> > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> >> > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> >> > ---
> >> > Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> >> > on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> >> > perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
> >>
> >> could you please paste the cgroup tree link?
> >
> >Do you mean this?
> >
> >  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/cgroup.git
> >
>
>
> Which branch and cset in that tree does you perf skel depends on?

I believe it's for-6.1 and the cset is in

  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/cgroup.git/commit/?h=for-6.1&id=7f203bc89eb66d6afde7eae91347fc0352090cc3

Thanks,
Namhyung

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Jiri Olsa]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 02:56:40PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Jiri,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 2:44 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> > > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> > > CO-RE technique.
> > >
> > > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> > > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > > Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> > > on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> > > perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
> >
> > could you please paste the cgroup tree link?
> 
> Do you mean this?
> 
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/cgroup.git

yea, wanted to try that.. I cherry-picked the 7f203bc89eb6 ;-)

thanks,
jirka

> 
> Thanks,.
> Namhyung

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Andrii Nakryiko]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 9:21 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> CO-RE technique.
>
> Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> check the field name in the cgroup struct.
>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> ---
> Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
>
>  tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> index 488bd398f01d..4fe61043de04 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> @@ -43,12 +43,39 @@ struct {
>         __uint(value_size, sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value));
>  } cgrp_readings SEC(".maps");
>
> +/* new kernel cgroup definition */
> +struct cgroup___new {
> +       int level;
> +       struct cgroup *ancestors[];
> +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> +
> +/* old kernel cgroup definition */
> +struct cgroup___old {
> +       int level;
> +       u64 ancestor_ids[];
> +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> +
>  const volatile __u32 num_events = 1;
>  const volatile __u32 num_cpus = 1;
>
>  int enabled = 0;
>  int use_cgroup_v2 = 0;
>
> +static inline __u64 get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(struct cgroup *cgrp, int level)
> +{
> +       /* recast pointer to capture new type for compiler */
> +       struct cgroup___new *cgrp_new = (void *)cgrp;
> +
> +       if (bpf_core_field_exists(cgrp_new->ancestors)) {
> +               return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_new, ancestors[level], kn, id);

have you checked generated BPF code for this ancestors[level] access?
I'd expect CO-RE relocation for finding ancestors offset and then just
normal + level * 8 arithmetic, but would be nice to confirm. Apart
from this, looks good to me:

Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>


> +       } else {
> +               /* recast pointer to capture old type for compiler */
> +               struct cgroup___old *cgrp_old = (void *)cgrp;
> +
> +               return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_old, ancestor_ids[level]);
> +       }
> +}
> +
>  static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
>  {
>         struct task_struct *p = (void *)bpf_get_current_task();
> @@ -70,7 +97,7 @@ static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
>                         break;
>
>                 // convert cgroup-id to a map index
> -               cgrp_id = BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp, ancestors[i], kn, id);
> +               cgrp_id = get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(cgrp, i);
>                 elem = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&cgrp_idx, &cgrp_id);
>                 if (!elem)
>                         continue;
> --
> 2.37.3.968.ga6b4b080e4-goog
>

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Namhyung Kim]

Hello,

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 3:48 PM Andrii Nakryiko
<andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 9:21 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> > CO-RE technique.
> >
> > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> > on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> > perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
> >
> >  tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> > index 488bd398f01d..4fe61043de04 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> > @@ -43,12 +43,39 @@ struct {
> >         __uint(value_size, sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value));
> >  } cgrp_readings SEC(".maps");
> >
> > +/* new kernel cgroup definition */
> > +struct cgroup___new {
> > +       int level;
> > +       struct cgroup *ancestors[];
> > +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> > +
> > +/* old kernel cgroup definition */
> > +struct cgroup___old {
> > +       int level;
> > +       u64 ancestor_ids[];
> > +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> > +
> >  const volatile __u32 num_events = 1;
> >  const volatile __u32 num_cpus = 1;
> >
> >  int enabled = 0;
> >  int use_cgroup_v2 = 0;
> >
> > +static inline __u64 get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(struct cgroup *cgrp, int level)
> > +{
> > +       /* recast pointer to capture new type for compiler */
> > +       struct cgroup___new *cgrp_new = (void *)cgrp;
> > +
> > +       if (bpf_core_field_exists(cgrp_new->ancestors)) {
> > +               return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_new, ancestors[level], kn, id);
>
> have you checked generated BPF code for this ancestors[level] access?
> I'd expect CO-RE relocation for finding ancestors offset and then just
> normal + level * 8 arithmetic, but would be nice to confirm. Apart
> from this, looks good to me:
>
> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>

Thanks for your review!

How can I check the generated code?  Do you have something works with
skeletons or do I have to save the BPF object somehow during the build?

Thanks,
Namhyung

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Andrii Nakryiko]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 7:31 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 3:48 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 9:21 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> > > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> > > CO-RE technique.
> > >
> > > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> > > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > > Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> > > on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> > > perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
> > >
> > >  tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> > > index 488bd398f01d..4fe61043de04 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> > > @@ -43,12 +43,39 @@ struct {
> > >         __uint(value_size, sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value));
> > >  } cgrp_readings SEC(".maps");
> > >
> > > +/* new kernel cgroup definition */
> > > +struct cgroup___new {
> > > +       int level;
> > > +       struct cgroup *ancestors[];
> > > +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> > > +
> > > +/* old kernel cgroup definition */
> > > +struct cgroup___old {
> > > +       int level;
> > > +       u64 ancestor_ids[];
> > > +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> > > +
> > >  const volatile __u32 num_events = 1;
> > >  const volatile __u32 num_cpus = 1;
> > >
> > >  int enabled = 0;
> > >  int use_cgroup_v2 = 0;
> > >
> > > +static inline __u64 get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(struct cgroup *cgrp, int level)
> > > +{
> > > +       /* recast pointer to capture new type for compiler */
> > > +       struct cgroup___new *cgrp_new = (void *)cgrp;
> > > +
> > > +       if (bpf_core_field_exists(cgrp_new->ancestors)) {
> > > +               return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_new, ancestors[level], kn, id);
> >
> > have you checked generated BPF code for this ancestors[level] access?
> > I'd expect CO-RE relocation for finding ancestors offset and then just
> > normal + level * 8 arithmetic, but would be nice to confirm. Apart
> > from this, looks good to me:
> >
> > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
>
> Thanks for your review!
>
> How can I check the generated code?  Do you have something works with
> skeletons or do I have to save the BPF object somehow during the build?
>

skeleton is generated from ELF BPF object file. You can do
llvm-objdump -d <obj.bpf.o> to see instructions. Unfortunately you
can't see BPF CO-RE relocations this way, you'd have to use something
like my custom tool ([0]).

But anyways, I checked locally similar code pattern and I think it's
all good from BPF CO-RE perspective. I see appropriate relocations in
all the necessary places. So this should work.

Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>

  [0] https://github.com/anakryiko/btfdump

> Thanks,
> Namhyung

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Jiri Olsa]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> CO-RE technique.
> 
> Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>

lgtm

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

jirka

> ---
> Arnaldo, I think this should go through the cgroup tree since it depends
> on the earlier change there.  I don't think it'd conflict with other
> perf changes but please let me know if you see any trouble, thanks!
> 
>  tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> index 488bd398f01d..4fe61043de04 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
> @@ -43,12 +43,39 @@ struct {
>  	__uint(value_size, sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value));
>  } cgrp_readings SEC(".maps");
>  
> +/* new kernel cgroup definition */
> +struct cgroup___new {
> +	int level;
> +	struct cgroup *ancestors[];
> +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> +
> +/* old kernel cgroup definition */
> +struct cgroup___old {
> +	int level;
> +	u64 ancestor_ids[];
> +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> +
>  const volatile __u32 num_events = 1;
>  const volatile __u32 num_cpus = 1;
>  
>  int enabled = 0;
>  int use_cgroup_v2 = 0;
>  
> +static inline __u64 get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(struct cgroup *cgrp, int level)
> +{
> +	/* recast pointer to capture new type for compiler */
> +	struct cgroup___new *cgrp_new = (void *)cgrp;
> +
> +	if (bpf_core_field_exists(cgrp_new->ancestors)) {
> +		return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_new, ancestors[level], kn, id);
> +	} else {
> +		/* recast pointer to capture old type for compiler */
> +		struct cgroup___old *cgrp_old = (void *)cgrp;
> +
> +		return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_old, ancestor_ids[level]);
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
>  {
>  	struct task_struct *p = (void *)bpf_get_current_task();
> @@ -70,7 +97,7 @@ static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
>  			break;
>  
>  		// convert cgroup-id to a map index
> -		cgrp_id = BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp, ancestors[i], kn, id);
> +		cgrp_id = get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(cgrp, i);
>  		elem = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&cgrp_idx, &cgrp_id);
>  		if (!elem)
>  			continue;
> -- 
> 2.37.3.968.ga6b4b080e4-goog
> 

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Tejun Heo]

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> CO-RE technique.
> 
> Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>

Looks like it's acked enough but the patch doesn't apply anymore. Namhyung,
can you please refresh the patch? I'll route this through
cgroup/for-6.1-fixes unless somebody objects.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Namhyung Kim]

Hi Tejun,

On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 4:59 PM Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 09:14:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> > CO-RE technique.
> >
> > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
>
> Looks like it's acked enough but the patch doesn't apply anymore. Namhyung,
> can you please refresh the patch? I'll route this through
> cgroup/for-6.1-fixes unless somebody objects.

Sorry about the conflict.  There was another change to get the perf
cgroup subsys id properly.  Will send v2 soon.

Thanks,
Namhyung

[PATCH v2] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Namhyung Kim]

The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
CO-RE technique.

Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
check the field name in the cgroup struct.

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
---
 tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
index 435a87556688..6a438e0102c5 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c
@@ -43,6 +43,18 @@ struct {
 	__uint(value_size, sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value));
 } cgrp_readings SEC(".maps");
 
+/* new kernel cgroup definition */
+struct cgroup___new {
+	int level;
+	struct cgroup *ancestors[];
+} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
+
+/* old kernel cgroup definition */
+struct cgroup___old {
+	int level;
+	u64 ancestor_ids[];
+} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
+
 const volatile __u32 num_events = 1;
 const volatile __u32 num_cpus = 1;
 
@@ -50,6 +62,21 @@ int enabled = 0;
 int use_cgroup_v2 = 0;
 int perf_subsys_id = -1;
 
+static inline __u64 get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(struct cgroup *cgrp, int level)
+{
+	/* recast pointer to capture new type for compiler */
+	struct cgroup___new *cgrp_new = (void *)cgrp;
+
+	if (bpf_core_field_exists(cgrp_new->ancestors)) {
+		return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_new, ancestors[level], kn, id);
+	} else {
+		/* recast pointer to capture old type for compiler */
+		struct cgroup___old *cgrp_old = (void *)cgrp;
+
+		return BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp_old, ancestor_ids[level]);
+	}
+}
+
 static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
 {
 	struct task_struct *p = (void *)bpf_get_current_task();
@@ -77,7 +104,7 @@ static inline int get_cgroup_v1_idx(__u32 *cgrps, int size)
 			break;
 
 		// convert cgroup-id to a map index
-		cgrp_id = BPF_CORE_READ(cgrp, ancestors[i], kn, id);
+		cgrp_id = get_cgroup_v1_ancestor_id(cgrp, i);
 		elem = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&cgrp_idx, &cgrp_id);
 		if (!elem)
 			continue;
-- 
2.38.0.rc1.362.ged0d419d3c-goog

Re: [PATCH v2] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Tejun Heo]

On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 10:28:08PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> CO-RE technique.
> 
> Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> check the field name in the cgroup struct.
> 
> Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>

Applied to cgroup/for-6.1-fixes.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

Re: [PATCH v2] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 06:53:43AM -1000, Tejun Heo escreveu:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 10:28:08PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> > CO-RE technique.

> > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
 
> > Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
 
> Applied to cgroup/for-6.1-fixes.

Hey, I noticed that the perf build is broken for the
tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c skell, so I tried using b4
on this Namhyung patch, it ended up getting a newer version, by Tejun,
that mixes up kernel code and tooling, which, when I tried to apply
upstream didn't work.

Please try not to mix up kernel and tools/ changes in the same patch to
avoid these issues.

Also when changing tools/perf, please CC me.

I'm now back trying to apply v2 of this patch to see if it fixes my
build.

Thanks,

- Arnaldo

Re: [PATCH v2] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 10:27:40AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 06:53:43AM -1000, Tejun Heo escreveu:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 10:28:08PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> > > the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> > > CO-RE technique.
> 
> > > Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> > > check the field name in the cgroup struct.
>  
> > > Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> > > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
>  
> > Applied to cgroup/for-6.1-fixes.
> 
> Hey, I noticed that the perf build is broken for the
> tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c skell, so I tried using b4
> on this Namhyung patch, it ended up getting a newer version, by Tejun,
> that mixes up kernel code and tooling, which, when I tried to apply
> upstream didn't work.
> 
> Please try not to mix up kernel and tools/ changes in the same patch to
> avoid these issues.
> 
> Also when changing tools/perf, please CC me.
> 
> I'm now back trying to apply v2 of this patch to see if it fixes my
> build.

Yeah, applying just Namhyung's v2 patch gets perf back building, I'll
keep it there while processing the other patches so that I can test them
all together.

- Arnaldo

Re: [PATCH v2] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Tejun Heo]

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 10:27:40AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Hey, I noticed that the perf build is broken for the
> tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c skell, so I tried using b4
> on this Namhyung patch, it ended up getting a newer version, by Tejun,
> that mixes up kernel code and tooling, which, when I tried to apply
> upstream didn't work.
> 
> Please try not to mix up kernel and tools/ changes in the same patch to
> avoid these issues.

I didn't write a newer version of this patch. What are you talking about?

-- 
tejun

Re: [PATCH v2] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 06:40:56AM -1000, Tejun Heo escreveu:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 10:27:40AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Hey, I noticed that the perf build is broken for the
> > tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c skell, so I tried using b4
> > on this Namhyung patch, it ended up getting a newer version, by Tejun,
> > that mixes up kernel code and tooling, which, when I tried to apply
> > upstream didn't work.

> > Please try not to mix up kernel and tools/ changes in the same patch to
> > avoid these issues.
 
> I didn't write a newer version of this patch. What are you talking about?

So, I saw this message from you in reply to Namhyung's v2 patch:

--------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 06:53:43 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf stat: Support old kernels for bperf cgroup counting
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>, Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Song Liu
        <songliubraving@fb.com>, bpf@vger.kernel.org, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Sender: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Y0Wfl88objrECjSo@slm.duckdns.org>

On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 10:28:08PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> The recent change in the cgroup will break the backward compatiblity in
> the BPF program.  It should support both old and new kernels using BPF
> CO-RE technique.

> Like the task_struct->__state handling in the offcpu analysis, we can
> check the field name in the cgroup struct.

> Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>

Applied to cgroup/for-6.1-fixes.

Thanks.

--
tejun
--------------------------

So, I picked the message id, Y0Wfl88objrECjSo@slm.duckdns.org, and asked
b4 to pick the patch:

⬢[acme@toolbox perf]$ b4 am --help | grep -A1 -- -c,
  -c, --check-newer-revisions
                        Check if newer patch revisions exist
⬢[acme@toolbox perf]$

⬢[acme@toolbox perf]$ b4 am -ctsl --cc-trailers Y0Wfl88objrECjSo@slm.duckdns.org
Grabbing thread from lore.kernel.org/all/Y0Wfl88objrECjSo%40slm.duckdns.org/t.mbox.gz
Checking for newer revisions on https://lore.kernel.org/all/
Analyzing 27 messages in the thread
('Acked-by', 'Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>', None)
Will use the latest revision: v3
You can pick other revisions using the -vN flag
Checking attestation on all messages, may take a moment...
---
  ✓ [PATCH v3] cgroup: Replace cgroup->ancestor_ids[] with ->ancestors[]
  ---
  ✓ Signed: DKIM/gmail.com (From: tj@kernel.org)
---
Total patches: 1
---
 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/YuRo2PLFH6wLgEkm@slm.duckdns.org
 Base: not specified
       git am ./v3_20220729_tj_cgroup_replace_cgroup_ancestor_ids_with_ancestors.mbx
⬢[acme@toolbox perf]$

Which got me this:

⬢[acme@toolbox perf]$ diffstat ./v3_20220729_tj_cgroup_replace_cgroup_ancestor_ids_with_ancestors.mbx
 include/linux/cgroup-defs.h                 |   16 ++++++++++------
 include/linux/cgroup.h                      |    8 +++-----
 kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c                      |    7 +++----
 net/netfilter/nft_socket.c                  |    9 +++++----
 tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c |    2 +-
 5 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
⬢[acme@toolbox perf]$

⬢[acme@toolbox perf]$ grep From: ./v3_20220729_tj_cgroup_replace_cgroup_ancestor_ids_with_ancestors.mbx
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
⬢[acme@toolbox perf]$

That mixes kernel and tools bits and touches
tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/bperf_cgroup.bpf.c, hence my request to add me
to the CC list for patches touching tools/perf/.

My assumption that it was a new patch was because b4 somehow got to
v3_20220729_tj_cgroup_replace_cgroup_ancestor_ids_with_ancestors,
which has v3 and touches the tools cgroup bpf skel.

So it seems b4 is confused somehow.

Hope this clarifies.

- Arnaldo