MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20211109115020.31623-1-german.gomez@arm.com> <20211109115020.31623-5-german.gomez@arm.com>
 <CAM9d7cg7Lp49xOc3BOhM4O9fqs7i+v6cNd=eaKWjDbREiE3Pvg@mail.gmail.com> <20211111074148.GC102075@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
In-Reply-To: <20211111074148.GC102075@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 10 Nov 2021 23:59:05 -0800
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cjW_=hDkHVWchNFDyqZXbbBwMb224hbZTMsCe34MLL-4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] perf arm-spe: Support hardware-based PID tracing
To:     Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Cc:     German Gomez <german.gomez@arm.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Leo,

On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 11:41 PM Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 11:28:48PM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > +static void arm_spe_set_pid_tid_cpu(struct arm_spe *spe,
> > > +                                   struct auxtrace_queue *queue)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct arm_spe_queue *speq = queue->priv;
> > > +       pid_t tid;
> > > +
> > > +       tid = machine__get_current_tid(spe->machine, speq->cpu);
> > > +       if (tid != -1) {
> > > +               speq->tid = tid;
> > > +               thread__zput(speq->thread);
> > > +       } else
> > > +               speq->tid = queue->tid;
> > > +
> > > +       if ((!speq->thread) && (speq->tid != -1)) {
> > > +               speq->thread = machine__find_thread(spe->machine, -1,
> > > +                                                   speq->tid);
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > > +       if (speq->thread) {
> > > +               speq->pid = speq->thread->pid_;
> > > +               if (queue->cpu == -1)
> > > +                       speq->cpu = speq->thread->cpu;
> > > +       }
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static int arm_spe_set_tid(struct arm_spe_queue *speq, pid_t tid)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct arm_spe *spe = speq->spe;
> > > +       int err = machine__set_current_tid(spe->machine, speq->cpu, tid, tid);
> >
> > I think we should pass -1 as pid as we don't know the real pid.
>
> AFAICT, I observe one case for machine__set_current_tid() returning error
> is 'speq->cpu' is -1 (this is the case for per-thread tracing).  In
> this case, if pass '-1' for pid/tid, it still will return failure.
>
> So here should return the error as it is.  Am I missing anything?

I'm not saying about the error.  It's about thread status.
In the machine__set_current_tid(), it calls
machine__findnew_thread() with given pid and tid.

I suspect it can set pid to a wrong value if the thread has
no pid value at the moment.

Thanks,
Namhyung