From: "Berthier, Emmanuel" <emmanuel.berthier@intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
"Jarzmik, Robert" <robert.jarzmik@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] [LBR] Dump LBRs on Exception
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 19:09:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <65CD3FC07F3BF942ABE211646D72D770356EC658@IRSMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrWO5jVaXrvtMmxEtV0-9husbwFrm=FLWUvEJJev25KXmg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8", Size: 2377 bytes --]
> From: Andy Lutomirski [mailto:luto@amacapital.net]
> Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 4:15 PM
> To: Berthier, Emmanuel
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner; H. Peter Anvin; X86 ML; Jarzmik, Robert; LKML
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] [LBR] Dump LBRs on Exception
>
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Berthier, Emmanuel
> <emmanuel.berthier@intel.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S b/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S
> > index df088bb..f39cded 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S
> > @@ -1035,6 +1035,46 @@ apicinterrupt IRQ_WORK_VECTOR \
> > irq_work_interrupt smp_irq_work_interrupt #endif
> >
> > +.macro STOP_LBR
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_LBR_DUMP_ON_EXCEPTION
> > + testl $3,CS+8(%rsp) /* Kernel Space? */
> > + jz 1f
> > + testl $1, lbr_dump_on_exception
>
> Is there a guarantee that, if lbr_dump_on_exception is true, then LBR is on?
> What happens if you schedule between stopping and resuming LBR?
Good point. The current assumption is to rely on the numerous exceptions to "re-arm" the LBR recording.
Even if we bypass UserSpace page faults, we can keep rely on kernel VMalloc page faults to re-arm the recording.
> > + jz 1f
> > + push %rax
> > + push %rcx
> > + push %rdx
> > + movl $MSR_IA32_DEBUGCTLMSR, %ecx
> > + rdmsr
> > + and $~1, %eax /* Disable LBR recording */
> > + wrmsr
>
> wrmsr is rather slow. Have you checked whether this is faster than just
> saving the LBR trace on exception entry?
The figures I have show that for common MSR, rdmsr and wrmsr have quite the same impact, around 100 cycles (greatly depends on the arch).
The cost of stop/start is: 2 rdmsr + 2 wrmsr = 4 msr
The cost of reading LBR is: 1 rdmsr for TOS + 2 rdmsr per record, and there are from 8 to 32 Records (Arch specific) = between 17 to 65 msr.
I've measured on Atom arch (8 records): LBR read versus stop/start: around x3 more time.
As the LBR size is arch dependent, it's not easy to implement the record reading in ASM without any branch, and this would generate maintenance dependency.
I prefer to let perf_event_lbr dealing with all that stuff.
Thx,
Emmanuel.
ÿôèº{.nÇ+·®+%Ëÿ±éݶ\x17¥wÿº{.nÇ+·¥{±þG«éÿ{ayº\x1dÊÚë,j\a¢f£¢·hïêÿêçz_è®\x03(éÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?¨èÚ&£ø§~á¶iOæ¬z·vØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?I¥
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-02 19:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-21 17:03 [PATCH] [LBR] Dump LBRs on Oops Emmanuel Berthier
2014-11-22 0:50 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-11-26 10:56 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
2014-11-26 13:08 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-11-26 14:17 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
2014-11-26 14:46 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-11-26 15:43 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
2014-11-27 14:40 ` [PATCH v2] [LBR] Dump LBRs on Exception Emmanuel Berthier
2014-11-27 21:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-11-27 21:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-11-28 8:44 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
2014-11-28 15:15 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-02 19:09 ` Berthier, Emmanuel [this message]
2014-12-02 19:33 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-02 19:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-12-02 20:12 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-03 18:25 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
2014-12-03 19:29 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-04 16:01 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
2014-12-04 18:09 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-05 13:14 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
2014-12-06 10:31 ` Robert Jarzmik
[not found] ` <CALCETrXhfzd9Fkikvm5qj0LWgWtDzgdpY_0EC3ChwyyGZksTMw@mail.gmail.com>
2014-12-07 18:40 ` Robert Jarzmik
2014-12-07 19:10 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-12 17:30 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
2014-12-12 17:54 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-11-28 10:28 ` Berthier, Emmanuel
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=65CD3FC07F3BF942ABE211646D72D770356EC658@IRSMSX110.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=emmanuel.berthier@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=robert.jarzmik@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®