Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf arm-spe: Parse more SPE fields and store source | From | German Gomez <> | Date | Fri, 28 Jan 2022 17:20:23 +0000 |
| |
Hi Ali,
On 25/01/2022 19:20, Ali Saidi wrote: > Decode more SPE events and op types to allow for processing by perf > scripts. For example looking for branches which may indicate candidates > for conversion to a CSEL, store exclusives that are candidates for > conversion to LSE atomics and record the source information for memory > ops. > > Signed-off-by: Ali Saidi <alisaidi@amazon.com> > --- > .../util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > .../util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.h | 8 ++++++++ > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.c b/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.c > index 5e390a1a79ab..177bac0f7128 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.c > +++ b/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.c > @@ -191,6 +191,20 @@ static int arm_spe_read_record(struct arm_spe_decoder *decoder) > decoder->record.op = ARM_SPE_ST; > else > decoder->record.op = ARM_SPE_LD; > + if (SPE_OP_PKT_IS_LDST_ATOMIC(payload)) { > + if (payload & SPE_OP_PKT_AT) > + decoder->record.op |= ARM_SPE_LDST_ATOMIC;
In "utils/arm-spe.c" we check "if (record->op == ARM_SPE_LD)" so this ORing could break some of the generated samples.
> + if (payload & SPE_OP_PKT_EXCL) > + decoder->record.op |= ARM_SPE_LDST_EXCL; > + if (payload & SPE_OP_PKT_AR) > + decoder->record.op |= ARM_SPE_LDST_ACQREL; > + } > + } else if (idx == SPE_OP_PKT_HDR_CLASS_BR_ERET) { > + decoder->record.op = ARM_SPE_BR; > + if (payload & SPE_OP_PKT_COND) > + decoder->record.op |= ARM_SPE_BR_COND; > + if (SPE_OP_PKT_IS_INDIRECT_BRANCH(payload)) > + decoder->record.op |= ARM_SPE_BR_IND; > } > break; > case ARM_SPE_EVENTS: > @@ -218,8 +232,12 @@ static int arm_spe_read_record(struct arm_spe_decoder *decoder) > if (payload & BIT(EV_MISPRED)) > decoder->record.type |= ARM_SPE_BRANCH_MISS; > > + if (payload & BIT(EV_NOT_TAKEN)) > + decoder->record.type |= ARM_SPE_BR_NOT_TAKEN; > + > break; > case ARM_SPE_DATA_SOURCE: > + decoder->record.source = payload; > break; > case ARM_SPE_BAD: > break; > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.h b/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.h > index 69b31084d6be..113e427afe99 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.h > +++ b/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-decoder.h > @@ -22,11 +22,18 @@ enum arm_spe_sample_type { > ARM_SPE_TLB_MISS = 1 << 5, > ARM_SPE_BRANCH_MISS = 1 << 6, > ARM_SPE_REMOTE_ACCESS = 1 << 7, > + ARM_SPE_BR_NOT_TAKEN = 1 << 8,
Can you rename it to ARM_SPE_BRANCH_NOT_TAKEN for consistency?
> }; > > enum arm_spe_op_type { > ARM_SPE_LD = 1 << 0, > ARM_SPE_ST = 1 << 1, > + ARM_SPE_LDST_EXCL = 1 << 2, > + ARM_SPE_LDST_ATOMIC = 1 << 3, > + ARM_SPE_LDST_ACQREL = 1 << 4, > + ARM_SPE_BR = 1 << 5, > + ARM_SPE_BR_COND = 1 << 6, > + ARM_SPE_BR_IND = 1 << 7,
I'm not sure if we should keep everything in one enum/bitmask. I'm also looking at adding more of the data from the packets to the record, and considering refactoring the record structure. I'll share here when I have something.
Thanks, German
> }; > > struct arm_spe_record { > @@ -40,6 +47,7 @@ struct arm_spe_record { > u64 virt_addr; > u64 phys_addr; > u64 context_id; > + u16 source; > }; > > struct arm_spe_insn;
| |