Hello Arnaldo,
Thanks for testing and reviewing this patch, and your precious suggestions.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 8:59 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 09:47:02AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 12:27:47PM +0800, Howard Chu wrote:
> > > changes in v4:
>
> > > - Add enum support to tracepoint arguments
>
> > That is cool, but see below the comment as having this as a separate
> > patch.
> >
> > Also please, on the patch that introduces ! syscall tracepoint enum args
> > BTF augmentation include examples of tracepoints being augmented. I'll
>
> You did it as a notes for v4, great, I missed that.
>
> > try here while testing the patch as-is.
>
> The landlock_add_rule continues to work, using the same test program I
> posted when testing your v1 patch:
>
> root@x1:~# perf trace -e landlock_add_rule
> 0.000 ( 0.016 ms): landlock_add_r/475518 landlock_add_rule(ruleset_fd: 1, rule_type: LANDLOCK_RULE_PATH_BENEATH, rule_attr: 0x7ffd790ff690) = -1 EBADFD (File descriptor in bad state)
> 0.115 ( 0.003 ms): landlock_add_r/475518 landlock_add_rule(ruleset_fd: 2, rule_type: LANDLOCK_RULE_NET_PORT, rule_attr: 0x7ffd790ff690) = -1 EBADFD (File descriptor in bad state)
>
> Now lets try with some of the !syscalls tracepoints with enum args:
>
> root@x1:~# perf trace -e timer:hrtimer_start --max-events=5
> 0.000 :0/0 timer:hrtimer_start(hrtimer: 0xffff8d4eff225050, function: 0xffffffff9e22ddd0, expires: 210588861000000, softexpires: 210588861000000, mode: HRTIMER_MODE_ABS)
> 18446744073709.551 :0/0 timer:hrtimer_start(hrtimer: 0xffff8d4eff2a5050, function: 0xffffffff9e22ddd0, expires: 210588861000000, softexpires: 210588861000000, mode: HRTIMER_MODE_ABS)
> 0.007 :0/0 timer:hrtimer_start(hrtimer: 0xffff8d4eff325050, function: 0xffffffff9e22ddd0, expires: 210588861000000, softexpires: 210588861000000, mode: HRTIMER_MODE_ABS)
> 0.007 :0/0 timer:hrtimer_start(hrtimer: 0xffff8d4eff3a5050, function: 0xffffffff9e22ddd0, expires: 210588861000000, softexpires: 210588861000000, mode: HRTIMER_MODE_ABS)
> 18446744073709.543 :0/0 timer:hrtimer_start(hrtimer: 0xffff8d4eff425050, function: 0xffffffff9e22ddd0, expires: 210588861000000, softexpires: 210588861000000, mode: HRTIMER_MODE_ABS)
> root@x1:~#
>
> Cool, it works!
>
> Now lets try and use it with filters, to get something other than HRTIMER_MODE_ABS:
>
> root@x1:~# perf trace -e timer:hrtimer_start --filter='mode!=HRTIMER_MODE_ABS' --max-events=5
> No resolver (strtoul) for "mode" in "timer:hrtimer_start", can't set filter "(mode!=HRTIMER_MODE_ABS) && (common_pid != 475859 && common_pid != 4041)"
> root@x1:~#
>
>
> oops, that is the next step then :-)
Sure, I will add support for enum filtering(enum string -> int).
>
> If I do:
>
> root@x1:~# pahole --contains_enumerator=HRTIMER_MODE_ABS
> enum hrtimer_mode {
> HRTIMER_MODE_ABS = 0,
> HRTIMER_MODE_REL = 1,
> HRTIMER_MODE_PINNED = 2,
> HRTIMER_MODE_SOFT = 4,
> HRTIMER_MODE_HARD = 8,
> HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED = 2,
> HRTIMER_MODE_REL_PINNED = 3,
> HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_SOFT = 4,
> HRTIMER_MODE_REL_SOFT = 5,
> HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED_SOFT = 6,
> HRTIMER_MODE_REL_PINNED_SOFT = 7,
> HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_HARD = 8,
> HRTIMER_MODE_REL_HARD = 9,
> HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED_HARD = 10,
> HRTIMER_MODE_REL_PINNED_HARD = 11,
> }
> root@x1:~#
>
> And then use the value for HRTIMER_MODE_ABS instead:
>
> root@x1:~# perf trace -e timer:hrtimer_start --filter='mode!=0' --max-events=1
> 0.000 :0/0 timer:hrtimer_start(hrtimer: 0xffff8d4eff225050, function: 0xffffffff9e22ddd0, expires: 210759990000000, softexpires: 210759990000000, mode: HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED_HARD)
> root@x1:~#
>
> Now also filtering HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED_HARD:
>
> root@x1:~# perf trace -e timer:hrtimer_start --filter='mode!=0 && mode != 10' --max-events=2
> 0.000 podman/178137 timer:hrtimer_start(hrtimer: 0xffffa2024468fda8, function: 0xffffffff9e2170c0, expires: 210886679225214, softexpires: 210886679175214, mode: HRTIMER_MODE_REL)
> 32.935 podman/5046 timer:hrtimer_start(hrtimer: 0xffffa20244fabc40, function: 0xffffffff9e2170c0, expires: 210886712159707, softexpires: 210886712109707, mode: HRTIMER_MODE_REL)
> root@x1:~#
>
> But this then should be a _third_ patch :-)
Sure.
>
> We're making progress!
>
> - Arnaldo
> See the comment about evsel__init_tp_arg_scnprintf() below. Also please
> do patches on top of previous work, i.e. the v3 patch should be a
> separate patch and this v4 should add the extra functionality, i.e. the
> support for !syscall tracepoint enum BTF augmentation.
Thank you for suggesting this. May I ask if this is saying that v3 and
v4 should all be separated?
> The convention here is that evsel__ is the "class" name, so the first
> arg is a 'struct evsel *', if you really were transforming this into a
> 'struct trace' specific "method" you would change the name of the C
> function to 'trace__init_tp_arg_scnprintf'.
Oops, my bad. Thanks for pointing it out.
>
> But in this case instead of passing the 'struct trace' pointer all the
> way down we should instead pass a 'bool *use_btf' argument, making it:
>
>
> static int evsel__init_tp_arg_scnprintf(struct evsel *evsel, bool *use_btf)
You are right, we should do that. Thanks for pointing out this silly
implementation. I think we should do the same for
syscall__set_arg_fmts(struct trace *trace, struct syscall *sc) as
well. Also, I forgot to delete the unused 'bool use_btf' in struct
syscall, I will delete it.
>
> Then, when evlist__set_syscall_tp_fields(evlist, &use_btf) returns,
> check that use_btf to check if we need to call
> trace__load_vmlinux_btf(trace).
> And when someone suggests you do something and you implement it, a
> Suggested-by: tag is as documented in:
>
> ⬢[acme@toolbox perf-tools-next]$ grep -A5 Suggested-by Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> Using Reported-by:, Tested-by:, Reviewed-by:, Suggested-by: and Fixes:
> A Suggested-by: tag indicates that the patch idea is suggested by the person
> named and ensures credit to the person for the idea. Please note that this
> tag should not be added without the reporter's permission
May I ask if you want a Suggested-by? Hats off to you sir.
Also, do you want me to do the fixes on evsel__init_tp_arg_scnprintf()
for tracepoint enum, and send it as v5, or just send a separate patch
for tracepoint enum, so we get a patch for syscall enum, and another
patch for tracepoint enum? Sorry to bother you on these trivial
things.
Thanks again for this detailed review, and valuable suggestions.
Thanks,
Howard
