Thanks Hesham. I also had an issue when I compiled for the Jetson Tegra K1:
[CC] kernel_final.s
In file included from
/home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/camkes/kernel/include/arch/arm/arch/32/mode/machine.h:19:0,
from
/home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/camkes/kernel/include/machine.h:17,
from
/home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/camkes/kernel/include/api/syscall.h:14,
from
/home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/camkes/kernel/src/api/faults.c:16:
/home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/camkes/kernel/include/plat/tk1/plat/machine/hardware.h:
In function 'handleReservedIRQ':
/home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/camkes/kernel/include/plat/tk1/plat/machine/hardware.h:157:9:
error: implicit declaration of function 'handleOverflowIRQ'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
handleOverflowIRQ();
^
/home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/camkes/kernel/include/plat/tk1/plat/machine/hardware.h:157:9:
error: nested extern declaration of 'handleOverflowIRQ'
[-Werror=nested-externs]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
/home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/camkes/kernel/Makefile:611: recipe for
target 'kernel_final.s' failed
make[1]: *** [kernel_final.s] Error 1
tools/common/project.mk:254: recipe for target 'kernel_elf' failed
make: *** [kernel_elf] Error 2
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:20 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks for reporting this. This issue only exists for KZM/ARMv6. I submitted
> a fix internally (1d8be141afa). Should be pushed to github by tomorrow.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hesham
> ________________________________________
> From: Andrew Gacek <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 9:18 AM
> To: Almatary, Hesham (Data61, Kensington NSW)
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [seL4] seL4 System Utilization / Benchmark
>
> Hi Hesham,
>
> I am using the master branch of seL4 which includes that commit.
> Here's how to duplicate the error:
>
> repo init -u https://github.com/seL4/camkes-manifest.git
> repo sync
> make arm_simple_defconfig
> make menuconfig # enable benchmarks
> make
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:11 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Regarding the error you get when you enable benchmarks, which kernel
>> revision are you using?
>> This error should be fixed after this commit (530852b) [1].
>>
>> [1]
>> https://github.com/seL4/seL4/commit/530852bbdc31b7bbc2ba920c4299714896ba0cd4
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Hesham
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Devel <[email protected]> on behalf of Andrew Gacek
>> <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 8:17 AM
>> To: Kuz, Ihor (Data61, Kensington NSW)
>> Cc: Danis, Adrian (Data61, Kensington NSW); [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [seL4] seL4 System Utilization / Benchmark
>>
>> Thanks again Adrian and Ihor for the help. I was able to get something
>> working which was good enough for my needs.
>>
>> In case anybody else is interested, I made a small change to the
>> kernel to get the TCB names back from
>> seL4_SysBenchmarkGetThreadUtilisation():
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/agacek/seL4/commit/d46d8bda0de9f359ddd5a121072da8fbd78dd5e0#diff-552047e74fda361e39f4612989dc0acf
>>
>> I modified camkes to give a component called 'perfmon' access to all TCB
>> caps:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/agacek/camkes-tool/commit/4a1c21f441ce0fa57879c29756e4908cfe58c7ce
>>
>> Then I created a user space perfmon component which would generate a
>> report when requested:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/smaccm/smaccm/commit/1eb9c5ce4cb1cb5475de7f832a1b69065f1e9946
>>
>> Most of this is brittle and hacked together of course, but it was good
>> enough for me to see how much of the CPU each component was using.
>> Here's some sample output from my application:
>>
>> 86.3% Virtual_Machine_inst.vm_shim_obj(1) (cap 0x22)
>> 2.8% CAN_Driver_inst.spi_obj(5) (cap 0x37)
>> 2.2% CAN_Driver_inst.spi_obj(7) (cap 0x26)
>> 1.3% dispatch_periodic_inst(3) (cap 0x21)
>> 1.1% CAN_Driver_inst.gpio_obj(7) (cap 0x17)
>> 0.7% UART_Driver_inst.uart_shim_obj(6) (cap 0x42)
>> 0.7% time_server.time_server(8) (cap 0x3e)
>> 0.6% CAN_Framing_inst(9) (cap 0x28)
>> 0.6% Decrypt_inst(7) (cap 0x2d)
>> ...
>>
>> -Andrew
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Andrew Gacek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I got an error when enabling benchmarking:
>>>
>>> /home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/perf/kernel/include/arch/arm/arch/benchmark_overflowHandler.h:
>>> In function 'handleOverflowIRQ':
>>> /home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/perf/kernel/include/arch/arm/arch/benchmark_overflowHandler.h:22:9:
>>> error: implicit declaration of function 'armv_handleOverflowIRQ'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> armv_handleOverflowIRQ();
>>> ^
>>> /home/ajgacek/phase3-workspace/perf/kernel/include/arch/arm/arch/benchmark_overflowHandler.h:22:9:
>>> error: nested extern declaration of 'armv_handleOverflowIRQ'
>>> [-Werror=nested-externs]
>>>
>>> I'll just hack around it, but I thought you guys would want to know.
>>>
>>> -Andrew
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:04 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> You should be able to call seL4 syscalls from a CAmkES component. Just
>>>> include the right headers (and link the library if necesary).
>>>>
>>>> Note that if the syscalls require caps, then you are on your own wrt how
>>>> to get the caps.
>>>>
>>>> Ihor
>>>>
>>>>> On 18 Jan 2017, at 12:29 pm, Andrew Gacek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Adrian. This is a useful start. It sounds like the easiest
>>>>> thing may be to overwrite some syscall that I don't use to loop over
>>>>> all the threads in the kernel and print out their debugging info.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, I've never called raw seL4 system calls from a camkes component
>>>>> before. Is it just a matter of calling seL4_BenchmarkResetLog() or
>>>>> seL4_BenchmarkFinalizeLog() directly in the control code for one of my
>>>>> components?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Andrew
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 7:23 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is some code already in the kernel to help you do this, although
>>>>>> it is
>>>>>> tested and fixed on an as used basis so may or may not work as I
>>>>>> describe.
>>>>>> You can enable the the thread utilization tracking with
>>>>>> make menuconfig -> seL4 Kernel -> Build Options -> Enable benchmarks ->
>>>>>> Track threads and kernel utilisation time
>>>>>> Once enabled you gain the following relevant functions
>>>>>>
>>>>>> seL4_BenchmarkResetLog()
>>>>>> Reset idle time and total run time and start capturing utilization
>>>>>> information
>>>>>>
>>>>>> seL4_BenchmarkFinalizeLog()
>>>>>> Calculate idle time, total run time and stop capturing utilization
>>>>>> information
>>>>>>
>>>>>> seL4_BenchmarkGetThreadUtilisation(seL4_Word tcb_cptr)
>>>>>> Retrieve the utilization for a particular thread where
>>>>>> seL4_GetMR(0) == Thread utilization (in cycles) of this (tcb_cptr) thread
>>>>>> seL4_GetMR(1) == Idle thread utilization (in cycles) between the last
>>>>>> call
>>>>>> to Reset and Finalize log
>>>>>> seL4_GetMR(2) == Totall execution time (in cycles) between the last call
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> Reset and Finalize log
>>>>>>
>>>>>> seL4_BenchmarkResetThreadUtilisation(seL4_Word tcb_cptr)
>>>>>> Reset the utilization of this thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The main problem with this API is that it requires you to have caps to
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> the threads you wish to get the information of, which in CAmkES is
>>>>>> generally
>>>>>> only the capdl-loader application. It is also designed with the idea that
>>>>>> you want to reset the utilization counts at the point you're querying
>>>>>> them,
>>>>>> i.e. you're doing some kind of benchmark and you just want utilization
>>>>>> over
>>>>>> that benchmark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hope this provides some use to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adrian
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed 18-Jan-2017 9:59 AM, Andrew Gacek wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm interested in seeing how much of the CPU is being used by the
>>>>>> various threads in my (camkes) application. I'd like a simple "Task
>>>>>> Manager" style report of the form:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 70% idle
>>>>>> 25% can_obj_7_0_control_9_tcb
>>>>>> 5% can_obj_7_Int_3_0000_tcb
>>>>>> 0% can_obj_7_0_fault_handler_15_
>>>>>> 0000_tcb
>>>>>> etc
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've tried poking around libsel4bench, but I don't see any obvious way
>>>>>> of benchmarking the whole system. From what I can tell, it's mostly
>>>>>> designed to get cycle counts from specific code segments. Is that
>>>>>> right? What's the best way to go about benchmarking the whole system?
>>>>>> It's only for debugging, so I'm willing to make some quick-and-dirty
>>>>>> changes to the kernel just to see the results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Andrew
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Devel mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Devel mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel
>>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel
