-----Original Message----- From: Leo Yan leo.yan@linaro.org Sent: 02 June 2020 10:40 To: Al Grant Al.Grant@arm.com Cc: Coresight ML coresight@lists.linaro.org; Andrea Brunato Andrea.Brunato@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix corrupt data after perf inject from
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 04:58:20PM +0800, Leo Yan wrote:
Hi Al,
On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 04:00:02PM +0000, Al Grant wrote:
(Hi - posted for review. There was a recent ABI breaking change (see commit reference below), after which perf inject on ETM creates corrupt files. The simple fix ends up with it using the new ABI. I have an alternative patch set that emulates the old ABI - for the benefit of tools like autofdo that can't yet consume the new ABI - but it's much messier.)
From: Al Grant al.grant@arm.com
Commit 42bbabed09ce6208026648a71a45b4394c74585a ("perf tools: Add hw_idx in struct branch_stack") changed the format of branch stacks in perf samples. When samples use this new format, a flag must be set in the corresponding event. Synthesized branch stacks generated from CoreSight ETM trace were using the new format, but not setting the event attribute, leading to consumers seeing corrupt data. This patch fixes the issue by setting the event attribute to indicate use
of the new format.
Fixes: 42bbabed09ce ("perf tools: Add hw_idx in struct branch_stack") Signed-off-by: Al Grant al.grant@arm.com Acked-by: Andrea Brunato andrea.brunato@arm.com
diff --git a/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c b/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c index 62d2f9b9ce1b..71a056e29675 100644 --- a/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c +++ b/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c @@ -1332,7 +1332,13 @@ static int cs_etm__synth_events(struct
cs_etm_auxtrace *etm,
} if (etm->synth_opts.last_branch)
{ attr.sample_type |= PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK;/* We don't use the hardware index, but the sample generationcode uses the new format branch_stack with this field,so the event attributes must indicate that it's present. */attr.branch_sample_type |= PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX;}For this patch itself, it looks good to me. But the change seems a workaround rather than directly fixing issues.
Essentially, this issue is caused by the data structure definition is mess for branch record, thus, I prefer to use below change (I don't test it, so just want to use the change to demonstrate the basic idea):
Sorry for rush sending email, give explaination for below change;
whether the sample type PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX has been set or not, we can always pass hw_idx from kernel to user space
No, the flag must match whether hw_idx is passed. If you're always passing it (even if it's -1) you must set the flag.
The point of this flag is to indicate the ABI break in sample records passed from the kernel to userspace. perf.data captured from older kernels will have just the 'nr' field followed by the branches, perf.data captured from newer kernels will have 'nr' followed by 'hw_idx' followed by the branches. The reader uses the flag to decide whether it needs to expect that extra word. The flag must match the sample, otherwise the branch stack and everything that follows it is corrupt.
, if without supporting hw_idx then will pass '-1' for the field.
Sure, this can be done any time - the kernel can do it, perf inject can do it. But it must set PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX to say the field is there. And perf's sample parser needs to be able to continue to handle records from older kernels, where the field isn't present and the flag isn't set.
I don't like the way perf_sample__branch_entries() is being used, or the way "struct branch_stack" has different formats even as an internal type - but I'm not proposing to refactor that, because it might break all sorts of things (e.g. support for Intel PT and LBR). My patch is the simplest possible fix and makes synthesized samples from ETM work like those from PT.
Al
This can help us to unify the structure 'branch_stack', which will always contain the item branch_stack::hw_idx, thus when the kernel or perf tool (like cs-etm or intel-pt) to generate branch record sample with the same definition for 'struct branch_stack'. The benefit is for more readable code and this can resolve issues both for cs-etm and intel-pt.
I think here have one concern is that this change will introduce a penalty for passing redundant hw_idx from kernel to user space if PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX is not used.
Thanks, Leo
---8<---
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c index e296c5c59c6f..f00a49293787 100644 --- a/kernel/events/core.c +++ b/kernel/events/core.c @@ -6831,6 +6831,8 @@ void perf_output_sample(struct
perf_output_handle *handle,
perf_output_put(handle, data->br_stack->nr); if (perf_sample_save_hw_index(event)) perf_output_put(handle, data->br_stack- hw_idx); +else +perf_output_put(handle, -1); perf_output_copy(handle, data->br_stack->entries,
size);
} else { /* diff --git a/tools/perf/util/branch.h b/tools/perf/util/branch.h index 17b2ccc61094..111bfb9d6635 100644 --- a/tools/perf/util/branch.h +++ b/tools/perf/util/branch.h @@ -50,23 +50,11 @@ struct branch_stack { };
/*
- The hw_idx is only available when PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_HW_INDEX is
applied.
- Otherwise, the output format of a sample with branch stack is
- struct branch_stack {
- *u64nr;
- *struct branch_entryentries[0];
- }
- Check whether the hw_idx is available,
- and return the corresponding pointer of entries[0].
*/
- Return the corresponding pointer of entries[0].
static inline struct branch_entry *perf_sample__branch_entries(struct perf_sample *sample) { -u64 *entry = (u64 *)sample->branch_stack;
-entry++; -if (sample->no_hw_idx) -return (struct branch_entry *)entry; -return (struct branch_entry *)(++entry); +return sample->branch_stack->entries; }
struct branch_type_stat { diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c index 96e5171dce41..88a919ee8f7c 100644 --- a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c +++ b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c @@ -2159,8 +2159,10 @@ int evsel__parse_sample(struct evsel *evsel, union
perf_event *event,
return -EFAULT;
sz = data->branch_stack->nr * sizeof(struct branch_entry); +/* +hw_idx */ +sz += sizeof(u64); if (evsel__has_branch_hw_idx(evsel)) -sz += sizeof(u64); +data->no_hw_idx = false; else data->no_hw_idx = true; OVERFLOW_CHECK(array, sz, max_size);
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.