mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>,
	Benjamin Block <bebl@mageta.org>,
	Hans Rosenfeld <hans.rosenfeld@amd.com>,
	hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com,
	eranian@google.com, brgerst@gmail.com, Andreas.Herrmann3@amd.com,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Benjamin Block <benjamin.block@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/5] x86, perf: implements lwp-perf-integration (rc1)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:40:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111219114023.GB29855@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4EEF1C3B.3010307@redhat.com>


* Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 12/19/2011 12:54 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 19.12.11 00:43:10, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > > So the question becomes, how well is it integrated: can perf 
> > > > 'record -a + perf report', or 'perf top' use LWP, to do 
> > > > system-wide precise [user-space] profiling and such?
> > > 
> > > There is only self-monitoring of a process possible, no 
> > > kernel and system-wide profiling. This is because we can 
> > > not allocate memory regions in the kernel for a thread 
> > > other than the current. This would require a complete 
> > > rework of mm code.
> >
> > Hm, i don't think a rework is needed: check the 
> > vmalloc_to_page() code in kernel/events/ring_buffer.c. Right 
> > now CONFIG_PERF_USE_VMALLOC is an ARM, MIPS, SH and Sparc 
> > specific feature, on x86 it turns on if 
> > CONFIG_DEBUG_PERF_USE_VMALLOC=y.
> >
> > That should be good enough for prototyping the kernel/user 
> > shared buffering approach.
> 
> LWP wants user memory, vmalloc is insufficient.  You need 
> do_mmap() with a different mm.

Take a look at PERF_USE_VMALLOC, it allows in-kernel allocated 
memory to be mmap()ed to user-space. It is basically a 
shared/dual user/kernel mode vmalloc implementation.

So all the conceptual pieces are there.

> You could let a workqueue call use_mm() and then do_mmap().  
> Even then it is subject to disruption by the monitored thread 
> (and may disrupt the monitored thread by playing with its 
> address space). [...]

Injecting this into another thread's context is indeed advanced 
stuff:

> [...] This is for thread monitoring only, I don't think 
> system-wide monitoring is possible with LWP.

That should be possible too, via two methods:

1) the easy hack: a (per cpu) vmalloc()ed buffer is made ring 3 
   accessible (by clearing the system bit in the ptes) - and 
   thus accessible to all user-space.

   This is obviously globally writable/readable memory so only a 
   debugging/prototyping hack - but would be a great first step 
   to prove the concept and see some nice perf top and perf 
   record results ...

2) the proper solution: creating a 'user-space vmalloc()' that 
   is per mm and that gets inherited transparently, across 
   fork() and exec(), and which lies outside the regular vma
   spaces. On 64-bit this should be straightforward.

   These vmas are not actually 'known' to user-space normally -
   the kernel PMU code knows about it and does what we do with
   PEBS: flushes it when necessary and puts it into the
   regular perf event channels.

   This solves the inherited perf record workflow immediately:
   the parent task just creates the buffer, which gets inherited 
   across exec() and fork(), into every portion of the workload.

   System-wide profiling is a small additional variant of this: 
   creating such a user-vmalloc() area for all tasks in the
   system so that the PMU code has them ready in the 
   context-switch code.

Solution #2 has the additional advantage that we could migrate 
PEBS to it and could allow interested user-space access to the 
'raw' PEBS buffer as well. (currently the PEBS buffer is only 
visible to kernel-space.)

I'd suggest the easy hack first, to get things going - we can 
then help out with the proper solution.

Thanks,

	Ingo


  reply	other threads:[~2011-12-19 11:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-11-29 12:41 [PATCH 0/9] rework of extended state handling, LWP support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 1/9] x86, xsave: warn on #NM exceptions caused by the kernel Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 2/9] x86, xsave: cleanup fpu/xsave support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 3/9] x86, xsave: cleanup fpu/xsave signal frame setup Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 4/9] x86, xsave: rework fpu/xsave support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 5/9] x86, xsave: remove unused code Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 6/9] x86, xsave: more cleanups Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 7/9] x86, xsave: remove lazy allocation of xstate area Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 8/9] x86, xsave: add support for non-lazy xstates Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 12:41 ` [PATCH 9/9] x86, xsave: add kernel support for AMDs Lightweight Profiling (LWP) Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-29 21:31 ` [PATCH 0/9] rework of extended state handling, LWP support Andi Kleen
2011-11-30 17:37   ` Hans Rosenfeld
2011-11-30 21:52     ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-01 20:36       ` Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-02  2:01         ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-12-02 11:20           ` Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-07 19:57             ` Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-07 20:00               ` [PATCH 7/8] x86, xsave: add support for non-lazy xstates Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-07 20:00                 ` [PATCH 8/8] x86, xsave: add kernel support for AMDs Lightweight Profiling (LWP) Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-05 10:22 ` [PATCH 0/9] rework of extended state handling, LWP support Ingo Molnar
2011-12-16 16:07   ` Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-16 16:12     ` [RFC 1/5] x86, perf: Implement software-activation of lwp Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-16 16:12       ` [RFC 2/5] perf: adds prototype for a new perf-context-type Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-16 16:12       ` [RFC 3/5] perf: adds a new pmu-initialization-call Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-16 16:12       ` [RFC 4/5] x86, perf: implements lwp-perf-integration (rc1) Hans Rosenfeld
2011-12-18  8:04         ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-18 15:22           ` Benjamin Block
2011-12-18 23:43             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-19  9:09               ` Robert Richter
2011-12-19 10:54                 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-19 11:12                   ` Avi Kivity
2011-12-19 11:40                     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2011-12-19 11:58                       ` Avi Kivity
2011-12-19 18:13                         ` Benjamin
2011-12-20  8:56                           ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-20  9:15                         ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-20  9:47                           ` Avi Kivity
2011-12-20 10:09                             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-20 15:27                               ` Joerg Roedel
2011-12-20 18:40                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-21  0:07                                   ` Joerg Roedel
2011-12-21 12:34                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-21 12:44                                       ` Avi Kivity
2011-12-21 13:22                                         ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-21 22:49                                           ` Joerg Roedel
2011-12-23 10:53                                             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-21 11:46                                   ` Gleb Natapov
2011-12-23 10:56                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-20 15:48                           ` Vince Weaver
2011-12-20 18:27                             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-20 22:47                               ` Vince Weaver
2011-12-21 12:00                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-12-21 13:55                                   ` Vince Weaver
2011-12-16 16:12       ` [RFC 5/5] x86, perf: adds support for the LWP threshold-int Hans Rosenfeld

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20111219114023.GB29855@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=Andreas.Herrmann3@amd.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=bebl@mageta.org \
    --cc=benjamin.block@amd.com \
    --cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=hans.rosenfeld@amd.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robert.richter@amd.com \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®