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;
Date:   Fri, 25 Jun 2021 12:11:59 +0200
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To:     "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     acme@kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        mingo@redhat.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
        Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@linux.intel.com,
        kan.liang@intel.com, yao.jin@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] perf tools: Fix pattern matching for same substring
 used in different pmu type
Message-ID: <YNWr7zsEaNPCn4CR@krava>
References: <20210609045738.1051-1-yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
 <982714a5-8a5d-8f8a-4e30-bd9a497ffa40@linux.intel.com>
 <4787334d-cf28-5b25-8d11-c767c52288f1@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <4787334d-cf28-5b25-8d11-c767c52288f1@linux.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 10:02:01AM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote:
> Hi Arnaldo, Jiri,
> 
> Any comments for this bug fix patch?
> 
> The issue does impact some uncore events and even some metrics.

sry for delay

SNIP

> > > Some different pmu types may have same substring. For example,
> > > on Icelake server, we have pmu types "uncore_imc" and
> > > "uncore_imc_free_running". Both pmu types have substring "uncore_imc".
> > > But the parser would wrongly think they are the same pmu type.
> > > 
> > > We enable an imc event,
> > > perf stat -e uncore_imc/event=0xe3/ -a -- sleep 1
> > > 
> > > Perf actually expands the event to:
> > > uncore_imc_0/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_1/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_2/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_3/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_4/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_5/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_6/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_7/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_free_running_0/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_free_running_1/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_free_running_3/event=0xe3/
> > > uncore_imc_free_running_4/event=0xe3/
> > > 
> > > That's because the "uncore_imc_free_running" matches the
> > > pattern "uncore_imc*".
> > > 
> > > Now we check that the last characters of pmu name is
> > > '_<digit>'.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: b2b9d3a3f021 ("perf pmu: Support wildcards on pmu name in dynamic pmu events")
> > > Signed-off-by: Jin Yao <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > ? tools/perf/util/parse-events.y |? 2 ++
> > > ? tools/perf/util/pmu.c????????? | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > ? tools/perf/util/pmu.h????????? |? 1 +
> > > ? 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/parse-events.y b/tools/perf/util/parse-events.y
> > > index aba12a4d488e..7a694c7f7f1a 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/util/parse-events.y
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/parse-events.y
> > > @@ -317,6 +317,8 @@ event_pmu_name opt_pmu_config
> > > ????????????????? strncmp($1, "uncore_", 7))
> > > ????????????????? name += 7;
> > > ????????????? if (!fnmatch(pattern, name, 0)) {
> > > +??????????????? if (!perf_pmu__valid_suffix($1, name))
> > > +??????????????????? continue;

could this be part of the fnmatch's pattern?

> > > ????????????????? if (parse_events_copy_term_list(orig_terms, &terms))
> > > ????????????????????? CLEANUP_YYABORT;
> > > ????????????????? if (!parse_events_add_pmu(_parse_state, list, pmu->name, terms, true, false))
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/pmu.c b/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
> > > index 88c8ecdc60b0..78af01959830 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
> > > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> > > ? #include <linux/compiler.h>
> > > ? #include <linux/string.h>
> > > ? #include <linux/zalloc.h>
> > > +#include <linux/ctype.h>
> > > ? #include <subcmd/pager.h>
> > > ? #include <sys/types.h>
> > > ? #include <errno.h>
> > > @@ -768,7 +769,7 @@ bool pmu_uncore_alias_match(const char *pmu_name, const char *name)
> > > ?????? */
> > > ????? for (; tok; name += strlen(tok), tok = strtok_r(NULL, ",", &tmp)) {
> > > ????????? name = strstr(name, tok);
> > > -??????? if (!name) {
> > > +??????? if (!name || !perf_pmu__valid_suffix(tok, (char *)name)) {
> > > ????????????? res = false;
> > > ????????????? goto out;
> > > ????????? }
> > > @@ -1872,3 +1873,25 @@ bool perf_pmu__has_hybrid(void)
> > > ????? return !list_empty(&perf_pmu__hybrid_pmus);
> > > ? }
> > > +
> > > +bool perf_pmu__valid_suffix(char *tok, char *pmu_name)
> > > +{
> > > +??? char *p;
> > > +
> > > +??? /*
> > > +???? * The pmu_name has substring tok. If the format of
> > > +???? * pmu_name is <tok> or <tok>_<digit>, return true.
> > > +???? */
> > > +??? p = pmu_name + strlen(tok);
> > > +??? if (*p == 0)
> > > +??????? return true;
> > > +
> > > +??? if (*p != '_')
> > > +??????? return false;
> > > +
> > > +??? ++p;
> > > +??? if (*p == 0 || !isdigit(*p))
> > > +??????? return false;
> > > +
> > > +??? return true;
> > > +}

hum, so we have pattern serch and then another function checking
if that search was ok.. I understand that's convenient, because
it's on 2 different places, but could we have some generic solution,
line one function/search that returns/search for valid pmu name?

thanks,
jirka