Peter Zijlstra [peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
| On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 10:40:37PM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
| > @@ -3743,7 +3762,13 @@ static u64 perf_event_aggregate(struct perf_event *event, u64 *enabled,
| > lockdep_assert_held(&event->child_mutex);
| >
| > list_for_each_entry(child, &event->child_list, child_list) {
| > +#if 0
| > + /*
| > + * TODO: Do we need this read() for group events on PMUs that
| > + * don't implement PERF_PMU_TXN_READ transactions?
| > + */
| > (void)perf_event_read(child, false);
| > +#endif
| > total += perf_event_count(child);
| > *enabled += child->total_time_enabled;
| > *running += child->total_time_running;
|
| Aw gawd, I've been an idiot!!
|
| I just realized this is a _CHILD_ loop, not a _SIBLING_ loop !!
|
| We need to flip the loops in perf_read_group(), find attached two
| patches that go on top of 1,2,4.
|
| After this you can add the perf_event_read() return value (just fold
| patches 6,8) after which you can do patch 10 (which has a broken
| Subject fwiw).
Thanks for the patches. I am building and testing, but have a question
on the second patch below:
<snip>
| Subject: perf: Invert perf_read_group() loops
| From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| Date: Thu Aug 6 13:41:13 CEST 2015
|
| In order to enable the use of perf_event_read(.group = true), we need
| to invert the sibling-child loop nesting of perf_read_group().
|
| Currently we iterate the child list for each sibling, this precludes
| using group reads. Flip things around so we iterate each group for
| each child.
|
| Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| ---
| kernel/events/core.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
| 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
|
| --- a/kernel/events/core.c
| +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
| @@ -3809,50 +3809,74 @@ u64 perf_event_read_value(struct perf_ev
| }
| EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(perf_event_read_value);
|
| -static int perf_read_group(struct perf_event *event,
| - u64 read_format, char __user *buf)
| +static void __perf_read_group_add(struct perf_event *leader, u64 read_format, u64 *values)
| {
| - struct perf_event *leader = event->group_leader, *sub;
| - struct perf_event_context *ctx = leader->ctx;
| - int n = 0, size = 0, ret;
| - u64 count, enabled, running;
| - u64 values[5];
| + struct perf_event *sub;
| + int n = 1; /* skip @nr */
This n = 1 is to skip over the values[0] = 1 + nr_siblings in the
caller.
Anyway, in __perf_read_group_add() we always start with n = 1, however
...
|
| - lockdep_assert_held(&ctx->mutex);
| + perf_event_read(leader, true);
| +
| + /*
| + * Since we co-schedule groups, {enabled,running} times of siblings
| + * will be identical to those of the leader, so we only publish one
| + * set.
| + */
| + if (read_format & PERF_FORMAT_TOTAL_TIME_ENABLED) {
| + values[n++] += leader->total_time_enabled +
| + atomic64_read(leader->child_total_time_enabled);
| + }
|
| - count = perf_event_read_value(leader, &enabled, &running);
| + if (read_format & PERF_FORMAT_TOTAL_TIME_RUNNING) {
| + values[n++] += leader->total_time_running +
| + atomic64_read(leader->child_total_time_running);
| + }
|
| - values[n++] = 1 + leader->nr_siblings;
| - if (read_format & PERF_FORMAT_TOTAL_TIME_ENABLED)
| - values[n++] = enabled;
| - if (read_format & PERF_FORMAT_TOTAL_TIME_RUNNING)
| - values[n++] = running;
| - values[n++] = count;
| + /*
| + * Write {count,id} tuples for every sibling.
| + */
| + values[n++] += perf_event_count(leader);
| if (read_format & PERF_FORMAT_ID)
| values[n++] = primary_event_id(leader);
|
| - size = n * sizeof(u64);
| + list_for_each_entry(sub, &leader->sibling_list, group_entry) {
| + values[n++] += perf_event_count(sub);
| + if (read_format & PERF_FORMAT_ID)
| + values[n++] = primary_event_id(sub);
| + }
| +}
|
| - if (copy_to_user(buf, values, size))
| - return -EFAULT;
| +static int perf_read_group(struct perf_event *event,
| + u64 read_format, char __user *buf)
| +{
| + struct perf_event *leader = event->group_leader, *child;
| + struct perf_event_context *ctx = leader->ctx;
| + int ret = leader->read_size;
| + u64 *values;
|
| - ret = size;
| + lockdep_assert_held(&ctx->mutex);
|
| - list_for_each_entry(sub, &leader->sibling_list, group_entry) {
| - n = 0;
| + values = kzalloc(event->read_size);
| + if (!values)
| + return -ENOMEM;
|
| - values[n++] = perf_event_read_value(sub, &enabled, &running);
| - if (read_format & PERF_FORMAT_ID)
| - values[n++] = primary_event_id(sub);
| + values[0] = 1 + leader->nr_siblings;
|
| - size = n * sizeof(u64);
| + /*
| + * By locking the child_mutex of the leader we effectively
| + * lock the child list of all siblings.. XXX explain how.
| + */
| + mutex_lock(&leader->child_mutex);
|
| - if (copy_to_user(buf + ret, values, size)) {
| - return -EFAULT;
| - }
| + __perf_read_group_add(leader, read_format, values);
... we don't copy_to_user() here,
| + list_for_each_entry(child, &leader->child_list, child_list)
| + __perf_read_group_add(child, read_format, values);
so won't we overwrite the values[], if we always start at n = 1
in __perf_read_group_add()?
|
| - ret += size;
| - }
| + mutex_unlock(&leader->child_mutex);
| +
| + if (copy_to_user(buf, values, event->read_size))
| + ret = -EFAULT;
| +
| + kfree(values);
|
| return ret;
| }
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
