From: "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
acme@kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
mingo@redhat.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
kan.liang@intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
yao.jin@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/7] perf/core: Define the common branch type classification
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 21:28:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5a0bee30-dd48-8cb1-df72-8175a26ccc4e@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170710131049.GA13471@gate.crashing.org>
Hi,
Following branch types should be common enough, right?
+ PERF_BR_COND = 1, /* conditional */
+ PERF_BR_UNCOND = 2, /* unconditional */
+ PERF_BR_IND = 3, /* indirect */
+ PERF_BR_CALL = 4, /* call */
+ PERF_BR_IND_CALL = 5, /* indirect call */
+ PERF_BR_RET = 6, /* return */
I decide to only define these types in this patch set. For other more
arch-related branch type, we can add it in future.
Is this OK?
Thanks
Jin Yao
On 7/10/2017 9:10 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 07:46:17PM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote:
>> 1. We all agree these definitions:
>>
>> + PERF_BR_COND = 1, /* conditional */
>> + PERF_BR_UNCOND = 2, /* unconditional */
>> + PERF_BR_IND = 3, /* indirect */
>> + PERF_BR_CALL = 4, /* call */
>> + PERF_BR_IND_CALL = 5, /* indirect call */
>> + PERF_BR_RET = 6, /* return */
>> + PERF_BR_SYSCALL = 7, /* syscall */
>> + PERF_BR_SYSRET = 8, /* syscall return */
>> + PERF_BR_IRET = 11, /* return from interrupt */
> Do we? It does not map very well to PowerPC branch types.
>
>> 2. I wish to keep following definitions for x86.
>>
>> + PERF_BR_IRQ = 9, /* hw interrupt/trap/fault */
>> + PERF_BR_INT = 10, /* sw interrupt */
>>
>> PERF_BR_INT is triggered by instruction "int" .
>> PERF_BR_IRQ is triggered by interrupts, traps, faults (the ring 0,3
>> transition).
> So your "PERF_BR_INT" is a system call? And PERF_BR_IRQ is not an
> interrupt request (as its name suggests), not what we call an "external
> interrupt" either; instead it is every interrupt that is not a system
> call?
>
> It also does not follow the lines of "software caused interrupt" vs.
> the rest.
>
>> 4. I'd like to add following types for powerpc.
>>
>> PERF_BR_COND_CALL /* Conditional call */
>> PERF_BR_COND_RET /* Condition return */
> Almost all PowerPC branches have a "conditional" version (only "syscall"
> and "sysret/iret" do not -- and those last two are the same, just like
> PERF_BR_INT seems to be the same as PERF_BR_SYSCALL).
>
> So how should those PERF_BR_* be used? It cannot be used in an
> architecture-neutral interface the way you define it now.
>
>
> Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-10 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-20 12:07 [PATCH v6 0/7] perf report: Show branch type Jin Yao
2017-04-20 9:36 ` Jiri Olsa
2017-04-23 8:36 ` Jin, Yao
2017-06-02 8:02 ` Jin, Yao
2017-06-26 6:24 ` Jin, Yao
2017-07-06 1:47 ` Jin, Yao
2017-04-20 12:07 ` [PATCH v6 1/7] perf/core: Define the common branch type classification Jin Yao
2017-07-07 8:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-10 5:19 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-07-10 6:05 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-07-10 8:16 ` Jin, Yao
2017-07-10 10:32 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-07-10 11:46 ` Jin, Yao
2017-07-10 13:10 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-07-10 13:28 ` Jin, Yao [this message]
2017-07-10 13:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-10 14:06 ` Jin, Yao
2017-07-11 2:28 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-07-11 3:00 ` Jin, Yao
2017-07-10 14:37 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-07-11 2:13 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-04-20 12:07 ` [PATCH v6 2/7] perf/x86/intel: Record branch type Jin Yao
2017-04-23 13:55 ` Jiri Olsa
2017-04-24 0:47 ` Jin, Yao
2017-05-08 0:49 ` Jin, Yao
2017-05-09 8:26 ` Jiri Olsa
2017-05-09 11:57 ` Jin, Yao
2017-05-09 12:39 ` Jiri Olsa
2017-05-10 0:18 ` Jin, Yao
2017-04-20 12:07 ` [PATCH v6 3/7] perf record: Create a new option save_type in --branch-filter Jin Yao
2017-04-20 12:07 ` [PATCH v6 4/7] perf report: Refactor the branch info printing code Jin Yao
2017-04-20 12:07 ` [PATCH v6 5/7] perf util: Create branch.c/.h for common branch functions Jin Yao
2017-04-20 12:07 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] perf report: Show branch type statistics for stdio mode Jin Yao
2017-04-20 12:07 ` [PATCH v6 7/7] perf report: Show branch type in callchain entry Jin Yao
2017-07-07 8:09 ` [PATCH v6 0/7] perf report: Show branch type Jiri Olsa
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=5a0bee30-dd48-8cb1-df72-8175a26ccc4e@linux.intel.com \
--to=yao.jin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=yao.jin@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).