Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 18:44:22 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>
Cc:     acme@kernel.org, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
        jolsa@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, songliubraving@fb.com,
        eranian@google.com, alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com,
        ak@linux.intel.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, megha.dey@intel.com,
        frederic@kernel.org, maddy@linux.ibm.com, irogers@google.com,
        kim.phillips@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        santosh.shukla@amd.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] perf: Rewrite core context handling
Message-ID: <YwOyZhk/eqrsPa1q@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20220113134743.1292-1-ravi.bangoria@amd.com>
 <YqdLH+ZU/sf4n0pa@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YqdP4NExuwOHdC0G@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <35394cb7-a490-5aeb-b3a8-0f46e3c8ca28@amd.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <35394cb7-a490-5aeb-b3a8-0f46e3c8ca28@amd.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 11:40:34AM +0530, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
> On 13-Jun-22 8:25 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 04:35:11PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> @@ -12125,6 +12232,8 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(perf_event_open,
> >>  		goto err_task;
> >>  	}
> >>  
> >> +	// XXX premature; what if this is allowed, but we get moved to a PMU
> >> +	// that doesn't have this.
> >>  	if (is_sampling_event(event)) {
> >>  		if (event->pmu->capabilities & PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_INTERRUPT) {
> >>  			err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > 
> > No; this really should be against the event's native PMU. If the event
> > can't natively sample, it can't sample when placed in another group
> > either.
> 
> Right. But IIUC, the question was, would there be any issue if we allow
> grouping of perf_sw_context sampling event as group leader and
> perf_{hw|invalid}_context counting event as group member. I think no. It
> should just work fine. And, there could be real usecases of it as you
> described in one old thread[1].

Like you I need to bend my brain around this again, but I'm not seeing a
contradiction. The use-case from [1] is a software sampler with a bunch
of non-sampling uncore events.

The uncore events aren't sampling, the are simply read by the software
event (SAMPLE_READ). And moving the sampling software event to the
non-sample capable uncore PMU shouldn't matter.

That is; the code as it stands here seems right, we should check
is_sampling_event() against an event's native pmu->capabilities.

Or am I misunderstanding things?