From: Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@kdab.com>
To: Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@kdab.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Yao Jin <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH] perf report: fix off-by-one for non-activation frames
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 17:04:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170515150444.6841-1-milian.wolff@kdab.com> (raw)
As the documentation for dwfl_frame_pc says, frames that
are no activation frames need to have their program counter
decremented by one to properly find the function of the caller.
This fixes many cases where perf report currently attributes
the cost to the next line. I.e. I have code like this:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
#include <thread>
#include <chrono>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
this_thread::sleep_for(chrono::milliseconds(1000));
this_thread::sleep_for(chrono::milliseconds(100));
this_thread::sleep_for(chrono::milliseconds(10));
return 0;
}
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now compile and record it:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
g++ -std=c++11 -g -O2 test.cpp
echo 1 | sudo tee /proc/sys/kernel/sched_schedstats
perf record \
--event sched:sched_stat_sleep \
--event sched:sched_process_exit \
--event sched:sched_switch --call-graph=dwarf \
--output perf.data.raw \
./a.out
echo 0 | sudo tee /proc/sys/kernel/sched_schedstats
perf inject --sched-stat --input perf.data.raw --output perf.data
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Before this patch, the report clearly shows the off-by-one issue.
Most notably, the last sleep invocation is incorrectly attributed
to the "return 0;" line:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Overhead Source:Line
........ ...........
100.00% core.c:0
|
---__schedule core.c:0
schedule
do_nanosleep hrtimer.c:0
hrtimer_nanosleep
sys_nanosleep
entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath .tmp_entry_64.o:0
__nanosleep_nocancel .:0
std::this_thread::sleep_for<long, std::ratio<1l, 1000l> > thread:323
|
|--90.08%--main test.cpp:9
| __libc_start_main
| _start
|
|--9.01%--main test.cpp:10
| __libc_start_main
| _start
|
--0.91%--main test.cpp:13
__libc_start_main
_start
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When compiling perf using libdwfl for unwinding instead of libunwind
and having this patch here applied, the issue is fixed. The report
becomes much more usable:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Overhead Source:Line
........ ...........
100.00% core.c:0
|
---__schedule core.c:0
schedule
do_nanosleep hrtimer.c:0
hrtimer_nanosleep
sys_nanosleep
entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath .tmp_entry_64.o:0
__nanosleep_nocancel .:0
std::this_thread::sleep_for<long, std::ratio<1l, 1000l> > thread:323
|
|--90.08%--main test.cpp:8
| __libc_start_main
| _start
|
|--9.01%--main test.cpp:9
| __libc_start_main
| _start
|
--0.91%--main test.cpp:10
__libc_start_main
_start
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Yao Jin <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@kdab.com>
---
tools/perf/util/unwind-libdw.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/perf/util/unwind-libdw.c b/tools/perf/util/unwind-libdw.c
index f90e11a555b2..943a06291587 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/unwind-libdw.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/unwind-libdw.c
@@ -168,12 +168,16 @@ frame_callback(Dwfl_Frame *state, void *arg)
{
struct unwind_info *ui = arg;
Dwarf_Addr pc;
+ bool isactivation;
- if (!dwfl_frame_pc(state, &pc, NULL)) {
+ if (!dwfl_frame_pc(state, &pc, &isactivation)) {
pr_err("%s", dwfl_errmsg(-1));
return DWARF_CB_ABORT;
}
+ if (!isactivation)
+ --pc;
+
return entry(pc, ui) || !(--ui->max_stack) ?
DWARF_CB_ABORT : DWARF_CB_OK;
}
--
2.13.0
next reply other threads:[~2017-05-15 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-15 15:04 Milian Wolff [this message]
2017-05-15 15:13 ` [PATCH] perf report: fix off-by-one for non-activation frames Milian Wolff
2017-05-16 1:57 ` Namhyung Kim
2017-05-16 9:00 ` Milian Wolff
2017-06-16 6:14 ` Jan Kratochvil
2017-06-16 11:51 ` Milian Wolff
2017-06-16 11:57 ` Jan Kratochvil
2017-06-16 19:54 ` Milian Wolff
2017-06-17 7:56 ` Namhyung Kim
2017-06-17 8:04 ` Jan Kratochvil
2017-06-17 11:13 ` Milian Wolff
2017-06-19 18:59 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2017-07-04 7:59 ` Milian Wolff
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=20170515150444.6841-1-milian.wolff@kdab.com \
--to=milian.wolff@kdab.com \
--cc=Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=yao.jin@linux.intel.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).