Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

[Masami Hiramatsu]

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 13:23:30 +0530
Ravi Bangoria  wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Thu,  2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530
> > Ravi Bangoria  wrote:
> >
> >> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has
> >> couple  of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code
> >> in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix
> >> b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers
> >> are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to convert arguments
> >> having no offset but still surrounds register with parenthesis
> >> for ex. 8@(%rdi) is converted to +(%di):u64 which is rejected
> >> by uprobe_events. It's causing failure at 'perf probe' for all
> >> SDT events on all archs except x86. With this patchset, I've
> >> solved these issues. (patch 2,3)
> >>
> >> Also, existing perf shows misleading message when user tries to
> >> record sdt event without probing it. I've prepared patch for
> >> the same. (patch 1)
> >>
> >> Apart from that, I've also added logic to support arguments with
> >> sdt marker on powerpc. (patch 4)
> >>
> >> There are cases where uprobe definition of sdt event goes beyond
> >> current limit MAX_CMDLEN (256) and in such case perf fails with
> >> seg fault. I've solve this issue. (patch 5)
> >>
> >> Note: This patchset is prepared on top of Alexis' v5 series.[1]
> >>
> >> [1] 
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1292251.html
> > Hmm, I must missed it. I'll check it...
> >
> 
> Hi Masami,
> 
> Can you please review this.

Thanks for kicking me :)


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu 

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

[Masami Hiramatsu]

On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 13:23:30 +0530
Ravi Bangoria  wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Thu,  2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530
> > Ravi Bangoria  wrote:
> >
> >> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has
> >> couple  of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code
> >> in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix
> >> b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers
> >> are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to convert arguments
> >> having no offset but still surrounds register with parenthesis
> >> for ex. 8@(%rdi) is converted to +(%di):u64 which is rejected
> >> by uprobe_events. It's causing failure at 'perf probe' for all
> >> SDT events on all archs except x86. With this patchset, I've
> >> solved these issues. (patch 2,3)
> >>
> >> Also, existing perf shows misleading message when user tries to
> >> record sdt event without probing it. I've prepared patch for
> >> the same. (patch 1)
> >>
> >> Apart from that, I've also added logic to support arguments with
> >> sdt marker on powerpc. (patch 4)
> >>
> >> There are cases where uprobe definition of sdt event goes beyond
> >> current limit MAX_CMDLEN (256) and in such case perf fails with
> >> seg fault. I've solve this issue. (patch 5)
> >>
> >> Note: This patchset is prepared on top of Alexis' v5 series.[1]
> >>
> >> [1] 
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1292251.html
> > Hmm, I must missed it. I'll check it...
> >
> 
> Hi Masami,
> 
> Can you please review this.

Thanks for kicking me :)


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu 

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

[Ravi Bangoria]

On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Thu,  2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530
> Ravi Bangoria  wrote:
>
>> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has
>> couple  of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code
>> in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix
>> b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers
>> are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to convert arguments
>> having no offset but still surrounds register with parenthesis
>> for ex. 8@(%rdi) is converted to +(%di):u64 which is rejected
>> by uprobe_events. It's causing failure at 'perf probe' for all
>> SDT events on all archs except x86. With this patchset, I've
>> solved these issues. (patch 2,3)
>>
>> Also, existing perf shows misleading message when user tries to
>> record sdt event without probing it. I've prepared patch for
>> the same. (patch 1)
>>
>> Apart from that, I've also added logic to support arguments with
>> sdt marker on powerpc. (patch 4)
>>
>> There are cases where uprobe definition of sdt event goes beyond
>> current limit MAX_CMDLEN (256) and in such case perf fails with
>> seg fault. I've solve this issue. (patch 5)
>>
>> Note: This patchset is prepared on top of Alexis' v5 series.[1]
>>
>> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1292251.html
> Hmm, I must missed it. I'll check it...
>

Hi Masami,

Can you please review this.

Thanks,
-Ravi

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

[Ravi Bangoria]

On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Thu,  2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530
> Ravi Bangoria  wrote:
>
>> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has
>> couple  of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code
>> in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix
>> b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers
>> are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to convert arguments
>> having no offset but still surrounds register with parenthesis
>> for ex. 8@(%rdi) is converted to +(%di):u64 which is rejected
>> by uprobe_events. It's causing failure at 'perf probe' for all
>> SDT events on all archs except x86. With this patchset, I've
>> solved these issues. (patch 2,3)
>>
>> Also, existing perf shows misleading message when user tries to
>> record sdt event without probing it. I've prepared patch for
>> the same. (patch 1)
>>
>> Apart from that, I've also added logic to support arguments with
>> sdt marker on powerpc. (patch 4)
>>
>> There are cases where uprobe definition of sdt event goes beyond
>> current limit MAX_CMDLEN (256) and in such case perf fails with
>> seg fault. I've solve this issue. (patch 5)
>>
>> Note: This patchset is prepared on top of Alexis' v5 series.[1]
>>
>> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1292251.html
> Hmm, I must missed it. I'll check it...
>

Hi Masami,

Can you please review this.

Thanks,
-Ravi

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

[Masami Hiramatsu]

On Thu,  2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530
Ravi Bangoria  wrote:

> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has
> couple  of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code
> in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix
> b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers
> are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to convert arguments
> having no offset but still surrounds register with parenthesis
> for ex. 8@(%rdi) is converted to +(%di):u64 which is rejected
> by uprobe_events. It's causing failure at 'perf probe' for all
> SDT events on all archs except x86. With this patchset, I've
> solved these issues. (patch 2,3)
> 
> Also, existing perf shows misleading message when user tries to
> record sdt event without probing it. I've prepared patch for
> the same. (patch 1)
> 
> Apart from that, I've also added logic to support arguments with
> sdt marker on powerpc. (patch 4)
> 
> There are cases where uprobe definition of sdt event goes beyond
> current limit MAX_CMDLEN (256) and in such case perf fails with
> seg fault. I've solve this issue. (patch 5)
> 
> Note: This patchset is prepared on top of Alexis' v5 series.[1]
> 
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1292251.html

Hmm, I must missed it. I'll check it...

Thanks!


> 
> Ravi Bangoria (5):
>   perf/sdt: Show proper hint
>   perf/sdt/x86: Add renaming logic for rNN and other registers
>   perf/sdt/x86: Move OP parser to tools/perf/arch/x86/
>   perf/sdt/powerpc: Add argument support
>   perf/probe: Change MAX_CMDLEN
> 
>  tools/lib/api/fs/tracing_path.c  |  16 +++-
>  tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/perf_regs.c | 115 ++
>  tools/perf/arch/x86/util/perf_regs.c | 137 
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/perf_regs.c  |   9 +-
>  tools/perf/util/perf_regs.h  |   7 +-
>  tools/perf/util/probe-event.c|   1 -
>  tools/perf/util/probe-file.c | 129 -
>  7 files changed, 294 insertions(+), 120 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.9.3
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu 

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

[Masami Hiramatsu]

On Thu,  2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530
Ravi Bangoria  wrote:

> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has
> couple  of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code
> in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix
> b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers
> are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to convert arguments
> having no offset but still surrounds register with parenthesis
> for ex. 8@(%rdi) is converted to +(%di):u64 which is rejected
> by uprobe_events. It's causing failure at 'perf probe' for all
> SDT events on all archs except x86. With this patchset, I've
> solved these issues. (patch 2,3)
> 
> Also, existing perf shows misleading message when user tries to
> record sdt event without probing it. I've prepared patch for
> the same. (patch 1)
> 
> Apart from that, I've also added logic to support arguments with
> sdt marker on powerpc. (patch 4)
> 
> There are cases where uprobe definition of sdt event goes beyond
> current limit MAX_CMDLEN (256) and in such case perf fails with
> seg fault. I've solve this issue. (patch 5)
> 
> Note: This patchset is prepared on top of Alexis' v5 series.[1]
> 
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1292251.html

Hmm, I must missed it. I'll check it...

Thanks!


> 
> Ravi Bangoria (5):
>   perf/sdt: Show proper hint
>   perf/sdt/x86: Add renaming logic for rNN and other registers
>   perf/sdt/x86: Move OP parser to tools/perf/arch/x86/
>   perf/sdt/powerpc: Add argument support
>   perf/probe: Change MAX_CMDLEN
> 
>  tools/lib/api/fs/tracing_path.c  |  16 +++-
>  tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/perf_regs.c | 115 ++
>  tools/perf/arch/x86/util/perf_regs.c | 137 
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/perf_regs.c  |   9 +-
>  tools/perf/util/perf_regs.h  |   7 +-
>  tools/perf/util/probe-event.c|   1 -
>  tools/perf/util/probe-file.c | 129 -
>  7 files changed, 294 insertions(+), 120 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.9.3
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu