Re: [PATCH v8] perf: Sharing PMU counters across compatible events

[Song Liu]

> On Dec 12, 2019, at 7:44 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 03:37:05PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 12, 2019, at 5:49 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 04:24:47PM -0800, Song Liu wrote:
>>> 
>>>> @@ -750,6 +752,16 @@ struct perf_event {
>>>> 	void *security;
>>>> #endif
>>>> 	struct list_head		sb_list;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* for PMU sharing */
>>>> +	struct perf_event		*dup_master;
>>>> +	/* check event_sync_dup_count() for the use of dup_base_* */
>>>> +	u64				dup_base_count;
>>>> +	u64				dup_base_child_count;
>>>> +	/* when this event is master,  read from master*count */
>>>> +	local64_t			master_count;
>>>> +	atomic64_t			master_child_count;
>>>> +	int				dup_active_count;
>>>> #endif /* CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS */
>>>> };
>>> 
>>>> +/* PMU sharing aware version of event->pmu->add() */
>>>> +static int event_pmu_add(struct perf_event *event,
>>>> +			 struct perf_event_context *ctx)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct perf_event *master;
>>>> +	int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* no sharing, just do event->pmu->add() */
>>>> +	if (!event->dup_master)
>>>> +		return event->pmu->add(event, PERF_EF_START);
>>> 
>>> Possibly we should look at the location of perf_event::dup_master to be
>>> in a hot cacheline. Because I'm thinking you just added a guaranteed
>>> miss here.
>> 
>> I am not quite sure the best location for these. How about:
>> 
>> diff --git i/include/linux/perf_event.h w/include/linux/perf_event.h
>> index 7d49f9251621..218cc7f75775 100644
>> --- i/include/linux/perf_event.h
>> +++ w/include/linux/perf_event.h
>> @@ -643,6 +643,16 @@ struct perf_event {
>>        local64_t                       count;
>>        atomic64_t                      child_count;
>> 
>> +       /* for PMU sharing */
>> +       struct perf_event               *dup_master;
>> +       /* check event_sync_dup_count() for the use of dup_base_* */
>> +       u64                             dup_base_count;
>> +       u64                             dup_base_child_count;
>> +       /* when this event is master,  read from master*count */
>> +       local64_t                       master_count;
>> +       atomic64_t                      master_child_count;
>> +       int                             dup_active_count;
>> +
>>        /*
>>         * These are the total time in nanoseconds that the event
>>         * has been enabled (i.e. eligible to run, and the task has
> 
> Ah, no. Only put dup_master somewhere hot. The rest is not that
> important. For instance, you can put it right next to event->pmu,
> because that's going to be used right next to it, right?

I see. Will fix in that way. 

Thanks,
Song