Re: [PATCH v14 04/10] perf record --off-cpu: Dump off-cpu samples in BPF

From: Howard Chu
Date: Tue Feb 11 2025 - 12:31:42 EST

Next message: Kurt Borja: "Re: [PATCH v10 09/14] platform/x86: Rename alienware-wmi.c"
Previous message: Jonathan Cameron: "Re: [PATCH v1 4/7] cxl/core: Use guard() to drop the goto pattern of cxl_dpa_free()"
In reply to: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo: "Re: [PATCH v14 04/10] perf record --off-cpu: Dump off-cpu samples in BPF"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hello Arnaldo,

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 9:28 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 10:12:14AM -0800, Howard Chu wrote:
> > Collect tid, period, callchain, and cgroup id and dump them when off-cpu
> > time threshold is reached.
> >
> > We don't collect the off-cpu time twice (the delta), it's either in
> > direct samples, or accumulated samples that are dumped at the end of
> > perf.data.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Howard Chu <howardchu95@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: James Clark <james.clark@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Kan Liang <kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241108204137.2444151-6-howardchu95@xxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 83 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c
> > index 1cdd4d63ea92..77fdc9e81db3 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c
> > @@ -19,11 +19,17 @@
> > #define MAX_ENTRIES 102400
> >
> > #define MAX_CPUS 4096
> > +#define MAX_OFFCPU_LEN 37
> > +
> > +struct stack {
> > + u64 array[MAX_STACKS];
> > +};
>
> So I needed to rename the above as it fails 'make -C tools/perf
> build-test', the direct make command line to hit that:
>
> ⬢ [acme@toolbox perf-tools-next]$ rm -rf /tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/ ; mkdir -p /tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/
> ⬢ [acme@toolbox perf-tools-next]$ alias m='rm -rf ~/libexec/perf-core/ ; make -k GEN_VMLINUX_H=1 CORESIGHT=1 O=/tmp/build/$(basename $PWD)/ -C tools/perf install-bin && perf test python && cat /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/feature/test-all.output'
> ⬢ [acme@toolbox perf-tools-next]$ m
> GENSKEL /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/util/bpf_skel/sample_filter.skel.h
> util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c:24:8: error: redefinition of 'stack'
> 24 | struct stack {
> | ^
> /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/util/bpf_skel/.tmp/../vmlinux.h:128096:8: note: previous definition is here
> 128096 | struct stack {
> | ^
> util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c:218:42: error: no member named 'array' in 'struct stack'
> 218 | for (int i = 0; i < MAX_STACKS && from->array[i]; ++i, ++len)
> | ~~~~ ^
> util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c:219:32: error: no member named 'array' in 'struct stack'
> 219 | to->array[n + 2 + i] = from->array[i];
> | ~~~~ ^
> 3 errors generated.
> make[2]: *** [Makefile.perf:1276: /tmp/build/perf-tools-next/util/bpf_skel/.tmp/off_cpu.bpf.o] Error 1
>
> So for now I'm adding the patch below to get it going.
>
> IIRC there was some discussion about ditching GEN_VMLINUX_H=1, we can
> remove this hack later if/when we progress on that.
>
> - Arnaldo
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c
> index 77fdc9e81db395d1..848a123e5610f17b 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/off_cpu.bpf.c
> @@ -21,7 +21,8 @@
> #define MAX_CPUS 4096
> #define MAX_OFFCPU_LEN 37
>
> -struct stack {
> +// We have a 'struct stack' in vmlinux.h when building with GEN_VMLINUX_H=1
> +struct __stack {
> u64 array[MAX_STACKS];
> };
>
> @@ -29,7 +30,7 @@ struct tstamp_data {
> __u32 stack_id;
> __u32 state;
> __u64 timestamp;
> - struct stack stack;
> + struct __stack stack;
> };
>
> struct offcpu_key {
> @@ -211,7 +212,7 @@ static inline int can_record(struct task_struct *t, int state)
> return 1;
> }
>
> -static inline int copy_stack(struct stack *from, struct offcpu_data *to, int n)
> +static inline int copy_stack(struct __stack *from, struct offcpu_data *to, int n)
> {
> int len = 0;
>
> @@ -231,7 +232,7 @@ static inline int copy_stack(struct stack *from, struct offcpu_data *to, int n)
> * information of the task, and dump it as a raw sample to perf ring buffer
> */
> static int off_cpu_dump(void *ctx, struct offcpu_data *data, struct offcpu_key *key,
> - struct stack *stack, __u64 delta)
> + struct __stack *stack, __u64 delta)
> {
> int n = 0, len = 0;

Ack. Sorry about that.

Thanks,
Howard
>
>
> > struct tstamp_data {
> > __u32 stack_id;
> > __u32 state;
> > __u64 timestamp;
> > + struct stack stack;
> > };
> >
> > struct offcpu_key {
> > @@ -41,6 +47,10 @@ struct {
> > __uint(max_entries, MAX_ENTRIES);
> > } stacks SEC(".maps");
> >
> > +struct offcpu_data {
> > + u64 array[MAX_OFFCPU_LEN];
> > +};
> > +
> > struct {
> > __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY);
> > __uint(key_size, sizeof(__u32));
> > @@ -48,6 +58,13 @@ struct {
> > __uint(max_entries, MAX_CPUS);
> > } offcpu_output SEC(".maps");
> >
> > +struct {
> > + __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY);
> > + __uint(key_size, sizeof(__u32));
> > + __uint(value_size, sizeof(struct offcpu_data));
> > + __uint(max_entries, 1);
> > +} offcpu_payload SEC(".maps");
> > +
> > struct {
> > __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_TASK_STORAGE);
> > __uint(map_flags, BPF_F_NO_PREALLOC);
> > @@ -106,6 +123,8 @@ const volatile bool uses_cgroup_v1 = false;
> >
> > int perf_subsys_id = -1;
> >
> > +__u64 offcpu_thresh_ns = 500000000ull;
> > +
> > /*
> > * Old kernel used to call it task_struct->state and now it's '__state'.
> > * Use BPF CO-RE "ignored suffix rule" to deal with it like below:
> > @@ -192,6 +211,47 @@ static inline int can_record(struct task_struct *t, int state)
> > return 1;
> > }
> >
> > +static inline int copy_stack(struct stack *from, struct offcpu_data *to, int n)
> > +{
> > + int len = 0;
> > +
> > + for (int i = 0; i < MAX_STACKS && from->array[i]; ++i, ++len)
> > + to->array[n + 2 + i] = from->array[i];
> > +
> > + return len;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * off_cpu_dump - dump off-cpu samples to ring buffer
> > + * @data: payload for dumping off-cpu samples
> > + * @key: off-cpu data
> > + * @stack: stack trace of the task before being scheduled out
> > + *
> > + * If the threshold of off-cpu time is reached, acquire tid, period, callchain, and cgroup id
> > + * information of the task, and dump it as a raw sample to perf ring buffer
> > + */
> > +static int off_cpu_dump(void *ctx, struct offcpu_data *data, struct offcpu_key *key,
> > + struct stack *stack, __u64 delta)
> > +{
> > + int n = 0, len = 0;
> > +
> > + data->array[n++] = (u64)key->tgid << 32 | key->pid;
> > + data->array[n++] = delta;
> > +
> > + /* data->array[n] is callchain->nr (updated later) */
> > + data->array[n + 1] = PERF_CONTEXT_USER;
> > + data->array[n + 2] = 0;
> > + len = copy_stack(stack, data, n);
> > +
> > + /* update length of callchain */
> > + data->array[n] = len + 1;
> > + n += len + 2;
> > +
> > + data->array[n++] = key->cgroup_id;
> > +
> > + return bpf_perf_event_output(ctx, &offcpu_output, BPF_F_CURRENT_CPU, data, n * sizeof(u64));
> > +}
> > +
> > static int off_cpu_stat(u64 *ctx, struct task_struct *prev,
> > struct task_struct *next, int state)
> > {
> > @@ -216,6 +276,16 @@ static int off_cpu_stat(u64 *ctx, struct task_struct *prev,
> > pelem->state = state;
> > pelem->stack_id = stack_id;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * If stacks are successfully collected by bpf_get_stackid(), collect them once more
> > + * in task_storage for direct off-cpu sample dumping
> > + */
> > + if (stack_id > 0 && bpf_get_stack(ctx, &pelem->stack, MAX_STACKS * sizeof(u64), BPF_F_USER_STACK)) {
> > + /*
> > + * This empty if block is used to avoid 'result unused warning' from bpf_get_stack().
> > + * If the collection fails, continue with the logic for the next task.
> > + */
> > + }
> > next:
> > pelem = bpf_task_storage_get(&tstamp, next, NULL, 0);
> >
> > @@ -230,11 +300,19 @@ static int off_cpu_stat(u64 *ctx, struct task_struct *prev,
> > __u64 delta = ts - pelem->timestamp;
> > __u64 *total;
> >
> > - total = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&off_cpu, &key);
> > - if (total)
> > - *total += delta;
> > - else
> > - bpf_map_update_elem(&off_cpu, &key, &delta, BPF_ANY);
> > + if (delta >= offcpu_thresh_ns) {
> > + int zero = 0;
> > + struct offcpu_data *data = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&offcpu_payload, &zero);
> > +
> > + if (data)
> > + off_cpu_dump(ctx, data, &key, &pelem->stack, delta);
> > + } else {
> > + total = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&off_cpu, &key);
> > + if (total)
> > + *total += delta;
> > + else
> > + bpf_map_update_elem(&off_cpu, &key, &delta, BPF_ANY);
> > + }
> >
> > /* prevent to reuse the timestamp later */
> > pelem->timestamp = 0;
> > --
> > 2.43.0

Next message: Kurt Borja: "Re: [PATCH v10 09/14] platform/x86: Rename alienware-wmi.c"
Previous message: Jonathan Cameron: "Re: [PATCH v1 4/7] cxl/core: Use guard() to drop the goto pattern of cxl_dpa_free()"
In reply to: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo: "Re: [PATCH v14 04/10] perf record --off-cpu: Dump off-cpu samples in BPF"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]