Re: [PATCH v2] perf report: distinguish between inliners in the same function

[Namhyung Kim]

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 12:01:54PM +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 3:21:58 AM CEST Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > Hi Milian,
> > 
> > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 08:10:50PM +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> > > On Freitag, 12. Mai 2017 15:01:29 CEST Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:37:01PM +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> > > > > On Mittwoch, 10. Mai 2017 07:53:52 CEST Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > > On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 11:35:36PM +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> > > > > <snip>
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > +static enum match_result match_chain_srcline(struct
> > > > > > > callchain_cursor_node
> > > > > > > *node, +					     struct callchain_list *cnode)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > +	char *left = get_srcline(cnode->ms.map->dso,
> > > > > > > +				 map__rip_2objdump(cnode->ms.map, cnode->ip),
> > > > > > > +				 cnode->ms.sym, true, false);
> > > > > > > +	char *right = get_srcline(node->map->dso,
> > > > > > > +				  map__rip_2objdump(node->map, node->ip),
> > > > > > > +				  node->sym, true, false);
> > > > > > > +	enum match_result ret = match_chain_strings(left, right);
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I think we need to check inlined srcline as well.  There might be a
> > > > > > case that two samples have different addresses (and from different
> > > > > > callchains) but happens to be mapped to a same srcline IMHO.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think I'm missing something, but isn't this what this function
> > > > > provides?
> > > > > The function above is now being used by the match_chain_inliner
> > > > > function
> > > > > below.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ah, or do you mean for code such as this:
> > > > > 
> > > > > ~~~~~
> > > > > inline_func_1(); inline_func_2();
> > > > > ~~~~~
> > > > > 
> > > > > Here, both branches could be inlined into the same line and the same
> > > > > issue
> > > > > would occur, i.e. different branches get collapsed into the first
> > > > > match
> > > > > for
> > > > > the given srcline?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hm yes, this should be fixed too.
> > > > 
> > > > OK.
> > > > 
> > > > > But, quite frankly, I think it just shows more and more that the
> > > > > current
> > > > > inliner support is really fragile and leads to lots of issues
> > > > > throughout
> > > > > the code base as the inlined frames are different from non-inlined
> > > > > frames, but should most of the same be handled just like them.
> > > > > 
> > > > > So, maybe it's time to once more think about going back to my initial
> > > > > approach: Make inlined frames code-wise equal to non-inlined frames,
> > > > > i.e.
> > > > > instead of requesting the inlined frames within match_chain, do it
> > > > > outside
> > > > > and create callchain_node/callchain_cursor instances (not sure which
> > > > > one
> > > > > right now) for the inlined frames too.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This way, we should be able to centrally add support for inlined
> > > > > frames
> > > > > and
> > > > > all areas will benefit from it:
> > > > > 
> > > > > - aggregation by srcline/function will magically work
> > > > > - all browsers will automatically display them, i.e. no longer need to
> > > > > duplicate the code for inliner support in perf script, perf report
> > > > > tui/
> > > > > stdio/...
> > > > > - we can easily support --inline in other tools, like `perf trace
> > > > > --call-
> > > > > graph`
> > > > > 
> > > > > So before I invest more time trying to massage match_chain to behave
> > > > > well
> > > > > for inline nodes, can I get some feedback on the above?
> > > > 
> > > > Fair enough.  I agree that it'd be better adding them as separate
> > > > callchain nodes when resolving callchains.
> > > 
> > > Can you, or anyone else more involved with the current callchain code,
> > > guide me a bit?
> > > 
> > > My previous attempt at doing this can be seen here:
> > > https://github.com/milianw/linux/commit/
> > > 71d031c9d679bfb4a4044226e8903dd80ea601b3
> > > 
> > > There are some issues with that. Most of it boils down to the question of
> > > how to feed an inlined frame into a callchain_cursor_node. The latter
> > > contains a symbol* e.g. and users of that class currently rely on using
> > > the IP to find e.g. the corresponding srcline.
> > > 
> > > From what I can see, we either have to hack inline nodes in there, cf. my
> > > original approach in the github repo above. Or, better, we would have to
> > > (heavily?) refactor the callchain_cursor_node struct and the code
> > > depending on it. What I have in mind would be something like adding two
> > > members to this struct:
> > > 
> > > const char* funcname;
> > > const char* srcline;
> > > 
> > > For non-inlined frames, the funcname aliases the `symbol->name` value, and
> > > the srcline is queried as-needed. For inlined frames the values from the
> > > inlined node struct are used. The inlined frames for a given code
> > > location would all share the same symbol and ip.
> > > 
> > > Would that be OK as a path forward?
> > 
> > I think you'd be better adding (fake) dso and sym to keep the inline
> > information.  The fake dso can be paired with the original dso and
> > maintain a tree of (inlined) symbols.  You may need a fake map to
> > point the fake dso then.  It seems a bit compilcated but that way the
> > code will be more consistent and easier to handle (e.g. for caching
> > and/or deletion) IMHO.
> 
> Can you expand on this please? How would that solve the problem of finding a 
> function name or srcline for a given inline frame?
> 
> I.e.: the function name is, currently, part of the sym. So the fake dso/map 
> would contain an internal, fake, string table which fake symbols could 
> leverage for the function name?
> 
> Sounds like doable, but also sounds like *a lot* of work. And I don't see how 
> that would solve the srcline situation: That one is queried on-demand based on 
> the IP of a frame. I would say that inline frames should keep the IP of the 
> first non-inlined frame. But that would make it impossible to find the srcline 
> for the N'th inlined frame... Am I missing something?

I agree that srcline info can be kept in callchain cursor nodes, but I
still think function name should be in (fake) symbols.  Sharing a
symbol for all inlined frames would not work for the children mode
IMHO.


> 
> > Also, for the children mode, callchain nodes should have enough
> > information to create hist entries (but I'm not sure how to apply
> > self periods for those inlined entries).
> 
> I'm not sure I'm following here either, but once inlined frames are normal 
> callchain nodes, all browsers will simply support them out of the box, no? All 
> of the aggregation and browsing features should just workâ. We'd only need to 
> patch the browsers for special usecases, like when we want to change the 
> visuals to make it clear that a given frame was actually inlined.

Yes, once inlined frames converted to callchain cursor nodes, it
should work out of the box.  But for children mode, it needs a symbol
to construct a hist entry from a callchain cursor node.  Please see
fill_callchain_info().  If you add the "(inline)" to the (fake) symbol
name, you don't even need to patch the browsers IMHO.

Thanks,
Namhyung