Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] perf-stat: enable counting events for BPF programs

From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Date: Wed Jan 20 2021 - 08:13:10 EST

Next message: Pratyush Yadav: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] mtd: spi-nor: Add Global Block Unlock command"
Previous message: Paul Cercueil: "[PATCH v2 1/3] drm: bridge/panel: Cleanup connector on bridge detach"
In reply to: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo: "Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] perf-stat: enable counting events for BPF programs"
Next in thread: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo: "Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] perf-stat: enable counting events for BPF programs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Em Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:30:21PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 09:54:50PM +0000, Song Liu escreveu:
> >
> >
> > > On Jan 19, 2021, at 8:31 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Em Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 11:42:49AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > >> Em Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 11:31:44AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > >>> Em Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 12:48:19AM +0000, Song Liu escreveu:
> > >>>>> On Jan 18, 2021, at 11:38 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>> We are looking at two issues:
> > >>>> 1. Cannot recursively attach;
> > >>>> 2. prog FD 3 doesn't have valid btf.
> > >>
> > >>>> #1 was caused by the verifier disallowing attaching fentry/fexit program
> > >>>> to program with type BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING (in bpf_check_attach_target).
> > >>>> This constraint was added when we only had fentry/fexit in the TRACING
> > >>>> type. We have extended the TRACING type to many other use cases, like
> > >>>> "tp_btf/", "fmod_ret" and "iter/". Therefore, it is good time to revisit
> > >>>> this constraint. I will work on this.
> > >>
> > >>>> For #2, we require the target program to have BTF. I guess we won't remove
> > >>>> this requirement.
> > >>
> > >>>> While I work on improving #1, could you please test with some kprobe
> > >>>> programs? For example, we can use fileslower.py from bcc.
> > >>
> > >>> Sure, and please consider improving the error messages to state what you
> > >>> described above.
> > >>
> > >> Terminal 1:
> > >>
> > >> [root@five perf]# perf trace -e 5sec.c
> > >> ^C
> > >> [root@five perf]# cat 5sec.c
> > >> #include <bpf.h>
> > >>
> > >> #define NSEC_PER_SEC 1000000000L
> > >>
> > >> int probe(hrtimer_nanosleep, rqtp)(void *ctx, int err, long long sec)
> > >> {
> > >> return sec / NSEC_PER_SEC == 5;
> > >> }
> > >>
> > >> license(GPL);
> > >> [root@five perf]# perf trace -e 5sec.c/max-stack=16/
> > >> 0.000 sleep/3739435 perf_bpf_probe:hrtimer_nanosleep(__probe_ip: -1743337312, rqtp: 5000000000)
> > >> hrtimer_nanosleep ([kernel.kallsyms])
> > >> common_nsleep ([kernel.kallsyms])
> > >> __x64_sys_clock_nanosleep ([kernel.kallsyms])
> > >> do_syscall_64 ([kernel.kallsyms])
> > >> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe ([kernel.kallsyms])
> > >> __clock_nanosleep_2 (/usr/lib64/libc-2.32.so)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Terminal 2:
> > >>
> > >> [root@five ~]# perf stat -e cycles -b 180 -I 1000
> > >> libbpf: elf: skipping unrecognized data section(9) .eh_frame
> > >> libbpf: elf: skipping relo section(15) .rel.eh_frame for section(9) .eh_frame
> > >> perf: util/bpf_counter.c:227: bpf_program_profiler__read: Assertion `skel != NULL' failed.
> > >> Aborted (core dumped)
> > >
> > > Out to lunch, will continue later, but this may help you figure this out
> > > till then :)
> > >
> > > Starting program: /root/bin/perf stat -e cycles -b 244 -I 1000
> > > [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
> > > Using host libthread_db library "/lib64/libthread_db.so.1".
> > >
> > > Breakpoint 1, bpf_program_profiler_load_one (evsel=0xce02c0, prog_id=244) at util/bpf_counter.c:96
> > > 96 {
> > > (gdb) n
> > > 104 prog_fd = bpf_prog_get_fd_by_id(prog_id);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 105 if (prog_fd < 0) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 109 counter = bpf_counter_alloc();
> > > (gdb)
> > > 110 if (!counter) {
> > > (gdb) n
> > > 115 skel = bpf_prog_profiler_bpf__open();
> > > (gdb) p counter
> > > $9 = (struct bpf_counter *) 0xce09e0
> > > (gdb) p *counter
> > > $10 = {skel = 0x0, list = {next = 0xce09e8, prev = 0xce09e8}}
> > > (gdb) p *counter
> > > $11 = {skel = 0x0, list = {next = 0xce09e8, prev = 0xce09e8}}
> > > (gdb) n
> > > libbpf: elf: skipping unrecognized data section(9) .eh_frame
> > > libbpf: elf: skipping relo section(15) .rel.eh_frame for section(9) .eh_frame
> > > 116 if (!skel) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 121 skel->rodata->num_cpu = evsel__nr_cpus(evsel);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 123 bpf_map__resize(skel->maps.events, evsel__nr_cpus(evsel));
> > > (gdb)
> > > 124 bpf_map__resize(skel->maps.fentry_readings, 1);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 125 bpf_map__resize(skel->maps.accum_readings, 1);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 127 prog_name = bpf_target_prog_name(prog_fd);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 128 if (!prog_name) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 133 bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, skel->obj) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 134 err = bpf_program__set_attach_target(prog, prog_fd, prog_name);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 135 if (err) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 133 bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, skel->obj) {
> > > (gdb) p evsel
> > > $12 = (struct evsel *) 0xce02c0
> > > (gdb) p evsel->name
> > > $13 = 0xce04e0 "cycles"
> > > (gdb) n
> > > 134 err = bpf_program__set_attach_target(prog, prog_fd, prog_name);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 135 if (err) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 133 bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, skel->obj) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 141 set_max_rlimit();
> > > (gdb)
> > > 142 err = bpf_prog_profiler_bpf__load(skel);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 143 if (err) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 148 assert(skel != NULL);
> > > (gdb)
> > > 149 counter->skel = skel;
> > > (gdb)
> > > 150 list_add(&counter->list, &evsel->bpf_counter_list);
> > > (gdb) c
> > > Continuing.
> > >
> > > Breakpoint 4, bpf_program_profiler__install_pe (evsel=0xce02c0, cpu=0, fd=3) at util/bpf_counter.c:247
> > > 247 {
> > > (gdb) n
> > > 252 list_for_each_entry(counter, &evsel->bpf_counter_list, list) {
> > > (gdb)
> > > 253 skel = counter->skel;
> > > (gdb) watch counter->skel
> > > Hardware watchpoint 6: counter->skel
> > > (gdb) p counter->skel
> > > $14 = (void *) 0xce0a00
> > > (gdb) n
> > > 254 assert(skel != NULL);
> > > (gdb) p skel
> > > $15 = (struct bpf_prog_profiler_bpf *) 0xce0a00
> > > (gdb) c
> > > Continuing.
> > >
> > > Hardware watchpoint 6: counter->skel
> > >
> > > Old value = (void *) 0xce0a00
> > > New value = (void *) 0x0
> > > 0x00000000005cf45e in bpf_program_profiler__install_pe (evsel=0xce02c0, cpu=0, fd=3) at util/bpf_counter.c:252
> > > 252 list_for_each_entry(counter, &evsel->bpf_counter_list, list) {
> >
> > So it was the list operation that set counter->skel to NULL? I am really confused...
>
> Yep, I'm confused as well and trying to reproduce this, but got
> sidetracked...

Coming back to this, now it is exploding later:

Breakpoint 8, bpf_program_profiler__install_pe (evsel=0xce02c0, cpu=22, fd=32) at util/bpf_counter.c:254
254 assert(skel != NULL);
(gdb) p skel
$52 = (struct bpf_prog_profiler_bpf *) 0xce0a00
(gdb) c
Continuing.

Breakpoint 4, bpf_program_profiler__install_pe (evsel=0xce02c0, cpu=23, fd=33) at util/bpf_counter.c:247
247 {
(gdb) p skel
$53 = (struct bpf_prog_profiler_bpf *) 0xce04c0
(gdb) c
Continuing.

Breakpoint 8, bpf_program_profiler__install_pe (evsel=0xce02c0, cpu=23, fd=33) at util/bpf_counter.c:254
254 assert(skel != NULL);
(gdb) p skel
$54 = (struct bpf_prog_profiler_bpf *) 0xce0a00
(gdb) c
Continuing.

Breakpoint 2, bpf_program_profiler__enable (evsel=0xce02c0) at util/bpf_counter.c:192
192 {
(gdb) n
196 list_for_each_entry(counter, &evsel->bpf_counter_list, list) {
(gdb)
197 assert(counter->skel != NULL);
(gdb)
198 ret = bpf_prog_profiler_bpf__attach(counter->skel);
(gdb) c
Continuing.

Breakpoint 3, bpf_program_profiler__read (evsel=0xce02c0) at util/bpf_counter.c:208
208 {
(gdb) c
Continuing.

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00000000005cf34b in bpf_program_profiler__read (evsel=0x0) at util/bpf_counter.c:224
224 list_for_each_entry(counter, &evsel->bpf_counter_list, list) {
(gdb) p evsel
$55 = (struct evsel *) 0x0
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00000000005cf34b in bpf_program_profiler__read (evsel=0x0) at util/bpf_counter.c:224
#1 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00000000005cf34b in bpf_program_profiler__read (evsel=0x0) at util/bpf_counter.c:224
#1 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
(gdb)
(gdb) info threads
Id Target Id Frame
* 1 Thread 0x7ffff647f900 (LWP 1725711) "perf" 0x00000000005cf34b in bpf_program_profiler__read (evsel=0x0) at util/bpf_counter.c:224
(gdb)

Next message: Pratyush Yadav: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] mtd: spi-nor: Add Global Block Unlock command"
Previous message: Paul Cercueil: "[PATCH v2 1/3] drm: bridge/panel: Cleanup connector on bridge detach"
In reply to: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo: "Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] perf-stat: enable counting events for BPF programs"
Next in thread: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo: "Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] perf-stat: enable counting events for BPF programs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]