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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221229204101.1099430-1-namhyung@kernel.org> <20221229204101.1099430-2-namhyung@kernel.org>
 <Y7wFJ+NF0NwnmzLa@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <Y7x3RUd67smv3EFQ@google.com>
 <CAM9d7ciVZCHk0YqpobfR+t0FPN_-tpnLgNbN981=EygkM_riDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y76xng1U6UYpIGaW@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <Y77nswJ7gMWekXTt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <Y77nswJ7gMWekXTt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jan 2023 09:59:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cjARKJ7Xj93k00KccJ+UQtytZn-g8nbWpz9nfT9s2nkhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf/core: Set data->sample_flags in perf_prepare_sample()
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
        Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 8:45 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 01:54:54PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 12:06:00PM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> >
> > > Another example, but in this case it's real, is ADDR.  We cannot update
> > > the data->addr just because filtered_sample_type has PHYS_ADDR or
> > > DATA_PAGE_SIZE as it'd lose the original value.
> >
> > Hmm, how about something like so?
> >
> > /*
> >  * if (flags & s) flags |= d; // without branches
> >  */
> > static __always_inline unsigned long
> > __cond_set(unsigned long flags, unsigned long s, unsigned long d)
> > {
> >       return flags | (d * !!(flags & s));
> > }
> >
> > Then:
> >
> >       fst = sample_type;
> >       fst = __cond_set(fst, PERF_SAMPLE_CODE_PAGE_SIZE, PERF_SAMPLE_IP);
> >       fst = __cond_set(fst, PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_PAGE_SIZE |
> >                             PERF_SAMPLE_PHYS_ADDR,      PERF_SAMPLE_ADDR);
> >       fst = __cond_set(fst, PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER,     PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER);
> >       fst &= ~data->sample_flags;
> >
>
> Hmm, I think it's better to write this like:
>
> static __always_inline unsigned long
> __cond_set(unsigned long flags, unsigned long s, unsigned long d)
> {
>         return d * !!(flags & s);
> }
>
>         fst = sample_type;
>         fst |= __cond_set(sample_type, PERF_SAMPLE_CODE_PAGE_SIZE, PERF_SAMPLE_IP);
>         fst |= __cond_set(sample_type, PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_PAGE_SIZE |
>                                        PERF_SAMPLE_PHYS_ADDR,      PERF_SAMPLE_ADDR);
>         fst |= __cond_set(sample_type, PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER,     PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER);
>         fst &= ~data->sample_flags;
>
> Which should be identical but has less data dependencies and thus gives
> an OoO CPU more leaway to paralleize things.

Looks good.  Let me try this.

Thanks,
Namhyung