On 28/06/2021 21:01, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 08:08:02PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 11:38:34AM +0100, James Clark wrote:
[...]
static int cs_etm__process_auxtrace_event(struct perf_session *session, union perf_event *event, struct perf_tool *tool __maybe_unused) @@ -2462,7 +2478,8 @@ static int cs_etm__process_auxtrace_event(struct perf_session *session, cs_etm__dump_event(etm, buffer); auxtrace_buffer__put_data(buffer); }
- }
- } else if (dump_trace)
dump_queued_data(etm, &event->auxtrace);IIUC, in the function cs_etm__process_auxtrace_event(), since "etm->data_queued" is always true, below flow will never run:
if (!etm->data_queued) { ...... if (dump_trace) if (auxtrace_buffer__get_data(buffer, fd)) { cs_etm__dump_event(etm, buffer); auxtrace_buffer__put_data(buffer); } }If so, it's better to use a new patch to polish the code.
Hi Leo,
I think this is not true in piped mode because there is no auxtrace index. In that mode, events are processed only in file order and cs_etm__process_auxtrace_event() is called for each buffer.
You can reproduce this with something like this:
./perf record -o - ls > stdio.data cat stdio.data | ./perf report -i -You are right! I tried these two commands with cs_etm event, just as you said, in this case, the AUX trace data is not queued; so the flow for "if (!etm->data_queued)" should be kept. If so, I am very fine for current change. Thanks for sharing the knowledge.
There are some other Coresight features that don't work as expected in this mode, like sorting timestamps between CPUs. The aux split patchset won't work either because random access isn't possible. And the TRBE patch that I'm working on now won't work, because it also requires the random access to lookup the flags on the AUX record to configure the decoder for unformatted trace.
There is a lot of things happening in this area. Based on the above should I still plan to review this set or should I wait for another revision?
From my point of view, this one is final. It looks like both Leo and I have tested
it with and without his snapshot changes and it's working as expected in both cases.
Thanks James
Thanks, Mathieu
Cool, looking forward for the patches :)
Leo