Received: by 2002:a05:6902:102b:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x11csp240227ybt; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 19:47:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyTVMYv8h8/KgMn/PRdvygYIBY6zdmvIS/u8j7zwlPgNoe8tG8dX/vD6hKgBXKBQsMsS4Y/ X-Received: by 2002:aa7:db57:: with SMTP id n23mr26130460edt.235.1593571651153; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 19:47:31 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1593571651; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=TCUU5gGs1eTnuXLwNqfmnDALfh8veupEM6YttZSVNangI4ygV3CR/5ulJAFdPOoXvU l94ZqEHiAljtCFjNhWMP6fmHNTTFJ+oJyYaHS7BmW9ZY+C60cbFkGNVuKaVkxqBbo9lm icVsWvppRfF+Z/OLPLMri39W5gMmC0mFdPFZ3EAVOPo4Ewdmpj/BzJUlya4Jc15Ua9+t Nd/z+wNwzBn3o9Re8ARRnWzVQ5P9YW3l8Y8owPdIucUcBLbCJMQtN/KuuT1t967O9vk4 VM9urlBebOU41zV/2xysqL1Jlpds9xCzeyXEEolyGBoAaMPDUYlAxfQZtZbq8G/m+4qG qsGA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=eUVScGN8STZd9jJpFk+XxnJnLf9rqRvabGPzWc4HzkQ=; b=kjG2DpXsmi5Aney3VvHAVDpjdCcF+M+T+aR2EwM8FBASDPOiTWiMzVenyeBZ5px1Ac dNi7H0nKp2H0rGZZg4GP8haP4hw0anhPSTsjRyZUOtZ+3t5Z0Db4QT0HFh0N4fAehj9B /5PF2ZDAREObYpxBC/Ci4j9KI4+s9voKACYN4BSVX6/oD7f2YPK+hnGWPt889ukKVoOI 2Nb/qiTSSdBnpMzgrrAkx60ESyBPa7yeZFk4OxdUI1Fzf6fMuqMQjXE8KufDfx5DzMPk nH3ZXxS1qyiJqw0ynkI3x5Pm8oyqy/9cRseadpYCfD+tkHjAXpdFPz2RGT9Le8sX9bX2 QmgA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id dm6si2833321edb.169.2020.06.30.19.47.07; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 19:47:31 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726560AbgGACq2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 22:46:28 -0400 Received: from atcsqr.andestech.com ([60.248.187.195]:48232 "EHLO ATCSQR.andestech.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725988AbgGACq2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 22:46:28 -0400 Received: from mail.andestech.com (atcpcs16.andestech.com [10.0.1.222]) by ATCSQR.andestech.com with ESMTP id 0612cYGv088370; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 10:38:34 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from alankao@andestech.com) Received: from andestech.com (10.0.15.65) by ATCPCS16.andestech.com (10.0.1.222) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.123.3; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 10:45:56 +0800 Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 10:45:57 +0800 From: Alan Kao To: Atish Patra CC: Zong Li , linux-riscv , Palmer Dabbelt , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List" , "Paul Walmsley" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Support raw event and DT for perf on RISC-V Message-ID: <20200701024557.GB27962@andestech.com> References: <20200701005129.GA27962@andestech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Originating-IP: [10.0.15.65] X-DNSRBL: X-MAIL: ATCSQR.andestech.com 0612cYGv088370 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 06:02:43PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 5:52 PM Alan Kao wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:19:09AM +0800, Zong Li wrote: > > > This patch set adds raw event support on RISC-V. In addition, we > > > introduce the DT mechanism to make our perf more generic and common. > > > > > > Currently, we set the hardware events by writing the mhpmeventN CSRs, it > > > would raise an illegal instruction exception and trap into m-mode to > > > emulate event selector CSRs access. It doesn't make sense because we > > > shouldn't write the m-mode CSRs in s-mode. Ideally, we should set event > > > selector through standard SBI call or the shadow CSRs of s-mode. We have > > > prepared a proposal of a new SBI extension, called "PMU SBI extension", > > > but we also discussing the feasibility of accessing these PMU CSRs on > > > s-mode at the same time, such as delegation mechanism, so I was > > > wondering if we could use SBI calls first and make the PMU SBI extension > > > as legacy when s-mode access mechanism is accepted by Foundation? or > > > keep the current situation to see what would happen in the future. > > > > > > This patch set also introduces the DT mechanism, we don't want to add too > > > much platform-dependency code in perf like other architectures, so we > > > put the mapping of generic hardware events to DT, then we can easy to > > > transfer generic hardware events to vendor's own hardware events without > > > any platfrom-dependency stuff in our perf. > > > > > > Zong Li (6): > > > dt-bindings: riscv: Add YAML documentation for PMU > > > riscv: dts: sifive: Add DT support for PMU > > > riscv: add definition of hpmcounter CSRs > > > riscv: perf: Add raw event support > > > riscv: perf: introduce DT mechanism > > > riscv: remove PMU menu of Kconfig > > > > > > > DT-based PMU registration looks good to me. Together with Anup's feedback, > > we can anticipate that the following items will be: > > > > - rewrite RISC-V PMU to a platform driver > > - propose SBI PMU extention > > - fixes: RV32 counter access, namings, etc. > > > > Yes, all are good directions towards better counting (`perf stat`) function. > > But as the original author of RISC-V perf port, please allow me to address > > the fundamental problems of RISC-V perf, again [0][1][2][3], that the sampling > > (`perf record`) function never earned enough respect. Counting gives you a > > shallow view regarding an application, while sampling demystifies one for you. > > > > The problems are three-fold > > (1) Interrupt > > Sampling in perf requires that a HPM raises an interrupt when it overflows. > > Making RISC-V perf platform driver or not has nothing to do with this. This > > requires more discussions in TGs. > > (2) S-mode access to PMU CSRs > > This is also addressed in this patch set but to me, it is kind of like a > > SBI-solves-them-all mindset to me. Perf event is for performance monitoring > > thus we should eliminate any possible overhead if we can. Setting event masks > > through SBI calls for counting maybe OK, but if we really take sampling and > > interrupt handling into consideration, it is questionable if it is still a > > viable way. > > (3) Registers, registers, registers > > There is just no enough CSR/function for perf sampling. The previous proposal > > explains why [2]. > > > > Perf sampling is off-topic but somehow related, so I bring it up here just > > for your information. > > > > As this patch set goes v2, the PMU porting guide in [0] should be removed since > > it contains no useful information anymore. > > > > [0] Documentation/riscv/pmu.rst > > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Onvlcl4e2IU > > [2] https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/issues/402 > > This proposal has been posted in Privileged Spec Task Group, in > > https://lists.riscv.org/g/tech-privileged-archive/message/488?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,Proposal,20,2,40,32306071 > > but never receive any feedback. > > [3] https://lists.riscv.org/g/tech-unixplatformspec/message/84 > > I intended to discuss [2] in the Unixplatform Spec Task Group at the > > online meeting, but obviously people were too busy knowing who the new > > RISC-V CTO is and what he has done to even follow the agenda. > > > > Sorry. The last meeting's agenda was derailed for numerous reasons. > Are you okay with discussing this during the next meeting ? > I have not scheduled one yet but will probably schedule it on next > Wednesday (8th July) if there is no objection. > I can check with Anup if he can present the SBI PMU extension as well. Thanks for the oppertunity. But I don't think that the time is enough for every important topic to be covered. What I provided in the previous citation [2] is a proposal, which need expert to judge and critique after thorough reading. The TG Chair should decide the priority of the items. If there is any chance for our proposal, I can give brief introductions. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-riscv mailing list > > linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv > > > > -- > Regards, > Atish