linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Suzuki Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V11 06/10] arm64/perf: Enable branch stack events via FEAT_BRBE
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 10:17:19 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cd1d272b-4794-d0d8-af43-aba4b7484b22@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZH3mhorKNo77hsv5@FVFF77S0Q05N>

On 6/5/23 19:13, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> +/*
>> + * A branch record with BRBINFx_EL1.LASTFAILED set, implies that all
>> + * preceding consecutive branch records, that were in a transaction
>> + * (i.e their BRBINFx_EL1.TX set) have been aborted.
>> + *
>> + * Similarly BRBFCR_EL1.LASTFAILED set, indicate that all preceding
>> + * consecutive branch records up to the last record, which were in a
>> + * transaction (i.e their BRBINFx_EL1.TX set) have been aborted.
>> + *
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 00 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 1 | LF = 0 | [TX success]
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 01 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 1 | LF = 0 | [TX success]
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 02 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 0 | LF = 0 |
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 03 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 1 | LF = 0 | [TX failed]
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 04 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 1 | LF = 0 | [TX failed]
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 05 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 0 | LF = 1 |
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | .. | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 0 | LF = 0 |
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 61 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 1 | LF = 0 | [TX failed]
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 62 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 1 | LF = 0 | [TX failed]
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + * | 63 | BRBSRC | BRBTGT | BRBINF | | TX = 1 | LF = 0 | [TX failed]
>> + * --------------------------------- -------------------
>> + *
>> + * BRBFCR_EL1.LASTFAILED == 1
>> + *
>> + * BRBFCR_EL1.LASTFAILED fails all those consecutive, in transaction
>> + * branches records near the end of the BRBE buffer.
>> + *
>> + * Architecture does not guarantee a non transaction (TX = 0) branch
>> + * record between two different transactions. So it is possible that
>> + * a subsequent lastfailed record (TX = 0, LF = 1) might erroneously
>> + * mark more than required transactions as aborted.
>> + */
> Linux doesn't currently support TME (and IIUC no-one has built it), so can't we
> delete the transaction handling for now? We can add a comment with somehing like:
> 
> /*
>  * TODO: add transaction handling for TME.
>  */
> 
> Assuming no-one has built TME, we might also be able to get an architectural
> fix to disambiguate the boundary between two transactions, and avoid the
> problem described above.
> 
> [...]
> 

OR can leave this unchanged for now. Then update it if and when the relevant
architectural fix comes in. The current TME branch records handling here, is
as per the current architectural specification.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-06-09  4:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-31  4:04 [PATCH V11 00/10] arm64/perf: Enable branch stack sampling Anshuman Khandual
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 01/10] drivers: perf: arm_pmu: Add new sched_task() callback Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-05  7:26   ` Mark Rutland
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 02/10] arm64/perf: Add BRBE registers and fields Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-05  7:55   ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-06  4:27     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-13 16:27   ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-14  2:59     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 03/10] arm64/perf: Add branch stack support in struct arm_pmu Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-05  7:58   ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-06  4:47     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 04/10] arm64/perf: Add branch stack support in struct pmu_hw_events Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-05  8:00   ` Mark Rutland
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 05/10] arm64/perf: Add branch stack support in ARMV8 PMU Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-02  2:33   ` Namhyung Kim
2023-06-05  2:43     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-05 12:05   ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-06 10:34     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-06 10:41       ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-08 10:13       ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-06-09  4:00         ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-09  9:54           ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-06-09  7:14         ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 06/10] arm64/perf: Enable branch stack events via FEAT_BRBE Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-02  1:45   ` Namhyung Kim
2023-06-05  3:00     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-05 13:43   ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-09  4:30     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-09 12:37       ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-09  4:47     ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2023-06-09 12:42       ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-09  5:22     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-09 12:47       ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-09 13:15         ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-12  8:35           ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-09 13:34         ` James Clark
2023-06-12 10:12           ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 07/10] arm64/perf: Add PERF_ATTACH_TASK_DATA to events with has_branch_stack() Anshuman Khandual
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 08/10] arm64/perf: Add struct brbe_regset helper functions Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-02  2:40   ` Namhyung Kim
2023-06-05  3:14     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-05 23:49       ` Namhyung Kim
2023-06-13 17:17   ` Mark Rutland
2023-06-14  5:14     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-14 10:59       ` Mark Rutland
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 09/10] arm64/perf: Implement branch records save on task sched out Anshuman Khandual
2023-05-31  4:04 ` [PATCH V11 10/10] arm64/perf: Implement branch records save on PMU IRQ Anshuman Khandual
2023-06-09 11:13 ` [PATCH V11 00/10] arm64/perf: Enable branch stack sampling Anshuman Khandual

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=cd1d272b-4794-d0d8-af43-aba4b7484b22@arm.com \
    --to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=james.clark@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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).