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;
Sender: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Sep 2020 23:36:23 +0900
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
        Li Bin <huawei.libin@huawei.com>, Wei Li <liwei391@huawei.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf stat: Fix segfault when counting armv8_pmu
 events
Message-ID: <20200924143623.GA357648@google.com>
References: <20200922031346.15051-1-liwei391@huawei.com>
 <20200922031346.15051-2-liwei391@huawei.com>
 <20200923054426.GG2893484@krava>
 <CAM9d7cjLKosv97fEUCATVTr0mkZL_W5oDzBSxde70RhOeZ=6fg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200923140747.GN2893484@krava>
 <CAM9d7cgT4qLH0mPM1nTRa-FYwjMOc4LOCUD_X0r21hdUUVLpRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200923201900.GQ2893484@krava>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200923201900.GQ2893484@krava>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:19:00PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:15:06PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > I think the problem is that armv8_pmu has a cpumask,
> > and the user requested per-task events.
> > 
> > The code tried to open the event with a dummy cpu map
> > since it's not a cpu event, but the pmu has cpu map and
> > it's passed to evsel.  So there's confusion somewhere
> > whether it should use evsel->cpus or a dummy map.
> 
> you're right, I have following cpus file in pmu:
> 
>   # cat /sys/devices/armv8_pmuv3_0/cpus 
>   0-3
> 
> covering all the cpus.. and once you have cpumask/cpus file,
> you're system wide by default in current code, but we should
> not crash ;-)
> 
> I tried to cover this case in patch below and I probably broke
> some other use cases, but perhaps we could allow to open counters
> per cpus for given workload
> 
> I'll try to look at this more tomorrow

I'm thinking about a different approach, we can ignore cpu map
for the ARM cpu PMU and use the dummy, not tested ;-)

Thanks
Namhyung


diff --git a/tools/lib/perf/evlist.c b/tools/lib/perf/evlist.c
index 2208444ecb44..cfcdbd7be066 100644
--- a/tools/lib/perf/evlist.c
+++ b/tools/lib/perf/evlist.c
@@ -45,6 +45,9 @@ static void __perf_evlist__propagate_maps(struct perf_evlist *evlist,
        if (!evsel->own_cpus || evlist->has_user_cpus) {
                perf_cpu_map__put(evsel->cpus);
                evsel->cpus = perf_cpu_map__get(evlist->cpus);
+       } else if (!evsel->system_wide && perf_cpu_map__empty(evlist->cpus)) {
+               perf_cpu_map__put(evsel->cpus);
+               evsel->cpus = perf_cpu_map__get(evlist->cpus);
        } else if (evsel->cpus != evsel->own_cpus) {
                perf_cpu_map__put(evsel->cpus);
                evsel->cpus = perf_cpu_map__get(evsel->own_cpus);