Re: [PATCH V7 08/14] perf/x86/intel: Generic support for hardware TopDown metrics

[Liang, Kan]

On 7/28/2020 9:44 AM, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 09:28:39AM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote:
> > On 7/28/2020 9:09 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:10:52PM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote:
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> > > > index 6cb079e0c9d9..010ac74afc09 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> > > > @@ -2405,27 +2405,18 @@ static u64 icl_update_topdown_event(struct
> > > > perf_event *event)
> > > >    	return slots;
> > > >    }
> > > >
> > > > -static void intel_pmu_read_topdown_event(struct perf_event *event)
> > > > +static void intel_pmu_read_event(struct perf_event *event)
> > > >    {
> > > > -	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> > > > -
> > > > -	/* Only need to call update_topdown_event() once for group read. */
> > > > -	if ((cpuc->txn_flags & PERF_PMU_TXN_READ) &&
> > > > -	    !is_slots_event(event))
> > > >    		return;
> > > >
> > > > -	perf_pmu_disable(event->pmu);
> > > > -	x86_pmu.update_topdown_event(event);
> > > > -	perf_pmu_enable(event->pmu);
> > > > -}
> > > > -
> > > > -static void intel_pmu_read_event(struct perf_event *event)
> > > > -{
> > > >    	if (event->hw.flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_AUTO_RELOAD)
> > > >    		intel_pmu_auto_reload_read(event);
> > > > -	else if (is_topdown_count(event) && x86_pmu.update_topdown_event)
> > > > -		intel_pmu_read_topdown_event(event);
> > > > -	else
> > > > +	else if (is_slots_count(event) && x86_pmu.update_topdown_event) {
> > > > +		perf_pmu_disable(event->pmu);
> > > > +		x86_pmu.update_topdown_event(event);
> > > > +		perf_pmu_enable(event->pmu);
> > > > +	} else
> > > >    		x86_perf_event_update(event);
> > > >    }
> > >
> > > I'm a little puzzled by this; what happens if you:
> > >
> > > 	fd = sys_perf_event_open(&attr_slots);
> > > 	fd1 = sys_perf_event_open(&attr_metric, .group_fd=fd);
> > >
> > > 	read(fd1);
> > >
> > > ?
> >
> > I did a quick test. It depends on the .read_format of attr_metric.
> > If PERF_FORMAT_GROUP is applied for attr_metric, perf_read_group() will be
> > invoked. The value of fd1 is updated correctly.
> > If the flag is not applied, 0 will be returned.
>
> Exactly :-), was that intentional?

Kind of, because a metric event must be in a group with the leader slots 
event. If a user reads (treats) the metric event as a singleton event, 
an invalid value should be expected.

> Because prior to this change that
> would've worked just fine.
>
> Now, I agree it's a daft thing, because that value is pretty useless
> without also having the slots value, but I feel we should be explicit in
> our choices here.
>
> If for example, we would've had hardware provide us the raw metric
> counters, instead of us having to reconstruct them, this would've been a
> semi useful thing.
>
> So I'm tempted to leave things as it, and keep this 'working'.

I will update the perf tool document to force the PERF_FORMAT_GROUP flag 
for each metric events.

Thanks,
Kan