> On 08-Jul-2020, at 5:34 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > Athira Rajeev > writes: >> From: Anju T Sudhakar >> >> Add extended regs to sample_reg_mask in the tool side to use >> with `-I?` option. Perf tools side uses extended mask to display >> the platform supported register names (with -I? option) to the user >> and also send this mask to the kernel to capture the extended registers >> in each sample. Hence decide the mask value based on the processor >> version. >> >> Signed-off-by: Anju T Sudhakar >> [Decide extended mask at run time based on platform] >> Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev >> Reviewed-by: Madhavan Srinivasan > > Will need an ack from perf tools folks, who are not on Cc by the looks. > Yes, my bad. Will make sure to add proper Cc >> diff --git a/tools/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/perf_regs.h b/tools/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/perf_regs.h >> index f599064..485b1d5 100644 >> --- a/tools/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/perf_regs.h >> +++ b/tools/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/perf_regs.h >> @@ -48,6 +48,18 @@ enum perf_event_powerpc_regs { >> PERF_REG_POWERPC_DSISR, >> PERF_REG_POWERPC_SIER, >> PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCRA, >> - PERF_REG_POWERPC_MAX, >> + /* Extended registers */ >> + PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR0, >> + PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR1, >> + PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR2, >> + /* Max regs without the extended regs */ >> + PERF_REG_POWERPC_MAX = PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCRA + 1, > > I don't really understand this idea of a max that's not the max. > >> }; >> + >> +#define PERF_REG_PMU_MASK ((1ULL << PERF_REG_POWERPC_MAX) - 1) >> + >> +/* PERF_REG_EXTENDED_MASK value for CPU_FTR_ARCH_300 */ >> +#define PERF_REG_PMU_MASK_300 (((1ULL << (PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR2 + 1)) - 1) \ >> + - PERF_REG_PMU_MASK) >> + >> #endif /* _UAPI_ASM_POWERPC_PERF_REGS_H */ >> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/include/perf_regs.h b/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/include/perf_regs.h >> index e18a355..46ed00d 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/include/perf_regs.h >> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/include/perf_regs.h >> @@ -64,7 +64,10 @@ >> [PERF_REG_POWERPC_DAR] = "dar", >> [PERF_REG_POWERPC_DSISR] = "dsisr", >> [PERF_REG_POWERPC_SIER] = "sier", >> - [PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCRA] = "mmcra" >> + [PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCRA] = "mmcra", >> + [PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR0] = "mmcr0", >> + [PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR1] = "mmcr1", >> + [PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR2] = "mmcr2", >> }; >> >> static inline const char *perf_reg_name(int id) >> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/perf_regs.c b/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/perf_regs.c >> index 0a52429..9179230 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/perf_regs.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/perf_regs.c >> @@ -6,9 +6,14 @@ >> >> #include "../../../util/perf_regs.h" >> #include "../../../util/debug.h" >> +#include "../../../util/event.h" >> +#include "../../../util/header.h" >> +#include "../../../perf-sys.h" >> >> #include >> >> +#define PVR_POWER9 0x004E >> + >> const struct sample_reg sample_reg_masks[] = { >> SMPL_REG(r0, PERF_REG_POWERPC_R0), >> SMPL_REG(r1, PERF_REG_POWERPC_R1), >> @@ -55,6 +60,9 @@ >> SMPL_REG(dsisr, PERF_REG_POWERPC_DSISR), >> SMPL_REG(sier, PERF_REG_POWERPC_SIER), >> SMPL_REG(mmcra, PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCRA), >> + SMPL_REG(mmcr0, PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR0), >> + SMPL_REG(mmcr1, PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR1), >> + SMPL_REG(mmcr2, PERF_REG_POWERPC_MMCR2), >> SMPL_REG_END >> }; >> >> @@ -163,3 +171,50 @@ int arch_sdt_arg_parse_op(char *old_op, char **new_op) >> >> return SDT_ARG_VALID; >> } >> + >> +uint64_t arch__intr_reg_mask(void) >> +{ >> + struct perf_event_attr attr = { >> + .type = PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE, >> + .config = PERF_COUNT_HW_CPU_CYCLES, >> + .sample_type = PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_INTR, >> + .precise_ip = 1, >> + .disabled = 1, >> + .exclude_kernel = 1, >> + }; >> + int fd, ret; >> + char buffer[64]; >> + u32 version; >> + u64 extended_mask = 0; >> + >> + /* Get the PVR value to set the extended >> + * mask specific to platform > > Comment format is wrong, and punctuation please. > >> + */ >> + get_cpuid(buffer, sizeof(buffer)); >> + ret = sscanf(buffer, "%u,", &version); > > This is powerpc specific code, why not just use mfspr(SPRN_PVR), rather > than redirecting via printf/sscanf. Hi Michael For perf tools, defines for `mfspr` , `SPRN_PVR` are in arch/powerpc/util/header.c So I have re-used existing utility. Otherwise, we will need to include these defines here as well Does that sounds good ? > >> + >> + if (ret != 1) { >> + pr_debug("Failed to get the processor version, unable to output extended registers\n"); >> + return PERF_REGS_MASK; >> + } >> + >> + if (version == PVR_POWER9) >> + extended_mask = PERF_REG_PMU_MASK_300; >> + else >> + return PERF_REGS_MASK; >> + >> + attr.sample_regs_intr = extended_mask; >> + attr.sample_period = 1; >> + event_attr_init(&attr); >> + >> + /* >> + * check if the pmu supports perf extended regs, before >> + * returning the register mask to sample. >> + */ >> + fd = sys_perf_event_open(&attr, 0, -1, -1, 0); >> + if (fd != -1) { >> + close(fd); >> + return (extended_mask | PERF_REGS_MASK); >> + } >> + return PERF_REGS_MASK; > > I think this would read a bit better like: > > mask = PERF_REGS_MASK; > > if (version == PVR_POWER9) > extended_mask = PERF_REG_PMU_MASK_300; > else > return mask; > > attr.sample_regs_intr = extended_mask; > attr.sample_period = 1; > event_attr_init(&attr); > > /* > * check if the pmu supports perf extended regs, before > * returning the register mask to sample. > */ > fd = sys_perf_event_open(&attr, 0, -1, -1, 0); > if (fd != -1) { > close(fd); > mask |= extended_mask; > } > > return mask; Sure, I will try with this change Thanks Athira > > > cheers