Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220420102354.468173-1-florian.fischer@muhq.space>
 <YmA48V09iBbqy6su@kernel.org> <CAM9d7cjcA0aYC1otY4WvCJ_h71P9wiHu42GK7iyv3=i01rQ26Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220423121557.z5gzbqadonmrg6ef@pasture> <CAM9d7cgcx42xD8QxOB+JBEL85mZU_va8FMiF31SRxABH8CakLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220426085826.f4jfu4cszbmjlafw@pasture>
In-Reply-To: <20220426085826.f4jfu4cszbmjlafw@pasture>
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:28:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cgEh0rGcwJGT3qF28=J8aQdrAa_XMQN=+QjCPvs8mKU6g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v4 next 0/3] perf stat: add user_time and system_time
 tool events
To:     Florian Fischer <florian.fischer@muhq.space>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
        Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:58 AM Florian Fischer
<florian.fischer@muhq.space> wrote:
>
> On 25.04.2022 12:06, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 5:16 AM Florian Fischer
> > <florian.fischer@muhq.space> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 22.04.2022 16:52, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 3:05 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> > > > <acme@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Em Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:23:51PM +0200, Florian Fischer escreveu:
> > > > > > This patch series adds new internal events to perf stat exposing the times spend
> > > > > > in user and kernel mode in nanoseconds reported by rusage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > During some benchmarking using perf it bothered me that I could not easily
> > > > > > retrieve those times from perf stat when using the machine readable output.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But perf definitely knows about those values because in the human readable output
> > > > > > they are present.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Therefore I exposed the times reported by rusage via the new tool events:
> > > > > > user_time and system_time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This allows to retrieved them in machine-readable output:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > $ ./perf stat -x, -e duration_time,user_time,system_time,cache-misses -- grep -q -r duration_time tools/perf
> > > > > > 72134524,ns,duration_time:u,72134524,100.00,,
> > > > > > 65225000,ns,user_time:u,65225000,100.00,,
> > > > > > 6865000,ns,ssystem_time:u,6865000,100.00,,
> >
> > > > Anyway it looks a little bit strange to me if we can get
> > > > system time in user mode only (the 'u' modifier).
> > >
> > > Sorry but I don't really understand what you mean.
> > > The system_time is reported to userspace via rusage filled by wait4(2).
> > > It will always report the value reported to the user space regardless of what
> > > counters perf has access to.
> > >
> > > If you run perf as user you get the same system_time (but with the ':u' suffix)
> > > as when you run perf as root or lower kernel.perf_event_paranoid to allow access
> > > to more counters.
> >
> > The ':u' modifier means that the event should count only in user mode.
> > So I think system_time:u should be 0 by definition.
> > Likewise, user_time:k should be handled as such.
>
> Not sure if this logic applies to tool events because the time spend in user mode
> or kernel mdoe stays the same regardless of where you count it.
>
> This is consistent with how duration_time works currently in perf stat.
>
> ./perf stat -e duration_time,duration_time:u,duration_time:k -- grep -q -r duration_time .
>
>  Performance counter stats for 'grep -q -r duration_time .':
>
>         29,012,558 ns   duration_time
>         29,012,558 ns   duration_time:u
>         29,012,558 ns   duration_time:k
>
>        0.029012558 seconds time elapsed
>
>        0.029088000 seconds user
>        0.000000000 seconds sys
>
> >
> > But as I said before, we already have the task-clock event, so it's not
> > clear why we need this too.  Also these tool events won't work for
> > other use cases like perf record.
>
> Maybe I do not know enough about perf but I think this is not exactly how those
> suffixes work. This is the output of perf of next-20220420 and my rusage tool
> event patches applied:
>
> $ sysctl kernel.perf_event_paranoid
> kernel.perf_event_paranoid = -1
>
> linux/tools/perf$ ./perf stat -e task-clock,task-clock:u,task-clock:k,\
>                                  duration_time,duration_time:u,duration_time:k,\
>                                  system_time,system_time:u,system_time:k,\
>                                  user_time,user_time:u,user_time:k -- grep -q -r duration_time .
>
>  Performance counter stats for 'grep -q -r duration_time .':
>
>              42.30 msec task-clock                #    0.483 CPUs utilized
>              42.30 msec task-clock:u              #    0.483 CPUs utilized
>              42.30 msec task-clock:k              #    0.483 CPUs utilized
>         87,533,340 ns   duration_time             #    2.069 G/sec
>         87,533,340 ns   duration_time:u           #    2.069 G/sec
>         87,533,340 ns   duration_time:k           #    2.069 G/sec
>         12,841,000 ns   system_time               #  303.547 M/sec
>         12,841,000 ns   system_time:u             #  303.547 M/sec
>         12,841,000 ns   system_time:k             #  303.547 M/sec
>         30,820,000 ns   user_time                 #  728.550 M/sec
>         30,820,000 ns   user_time:u               #  728.550 M/sec
>         30,820,000 ns   user_time:k               #  728.550 M/sec
>
>        0.087533340 seconds time elapsed
>
>        0.030820000 seconds user
>        0.012841000 seconds sys
>
>
> So task-clock regardless of its ':u' or ':k' suffix shows approximately the wall
> clock time.

Ok, now I recall that these software events don't work with modifiers well.
Maybe we should reject or ignore setting modifiers on them.  But that's
a different work, of course.

>
> But for my experiments on a shared system where kernel.perf_event_paranoid is
> not set to -1 and I feel uncomfortable to test research prototypes as root I
> would like a simple and fast way to tell where my program spends its time.
>
> This can be achieved by using user_time and system_time.
> Which are reported in the human readable output anyway.
>
> Maybe I am doing something wrong here but as shown above task-clock does not
> provide the information I am interested in.

No, it's just me making this noise.  Thank you for taking the time to take
a look at the issue.

Thanks,
Namhyung