Re: Invalid perf_branch_entry.to entries question

[Michael Neuling]

Stephane Eranian <eranian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 11:35:28AM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote:
> >> Peter & Stephane,
> >>
> >> We are plumbing the POWER8 Branch History Rolling Buffer (BHRB) into
> >> struct perf_branch_entry.
> >>
> >> Sometimes on POWER8 we may not be able to fill out the "to" address.
> >
> > Just because I'm curious.. however does that happen? Surely the CPU knows where
> > next to fetch instructions?
> >
> >> We
> >> initially thought of just making this 0, but it's feasible that this
> >> could be a valid address to branch to.
> >
> > Right, while highly unlikely, x86 actually has some cases where 0 address is
> > valid *shudder*..
> >
> >> The other logical value to indicate an invalid entry would be all 1s
> >> which is not possible (on POWER at least).
> >>
> >> Do you guys have a preference as to what we should use as an invalid
> >> entry?  This would have some consequences for the userspace tool also.
> >>
> >> The alternative would be to add a flag alongside mispred/predicted to
> >> indicate the validity of the "to" address.
> >
> > Either would work with me I suppose.. Stephane do you have any preference?
> 
> But if the 'to' is bogus, why not just drop the sample?
> That happens on x86 if the HW captured branches which do not correspond to
> user filter settings (due to bug).

We can I guess but it seems useful to log the from address when
possible.  

Can we log it and userspace tools can ignore it if it's not useful?

Mikey
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/