Re: [PATCH v6 1/7] perf/core: Define the common branch type classification

Hi Michael,

Please let me summarize for the new branch type definitions.

1. We all agree these definitions:

+	PERF_BR_COND		= 1,	/* conditional */
+	PERF_BR_UNCOND		= 2,	/* unconditional */
+	PERF_BR_IND		= 3,	/* indirect */
+	PERF_BR_CALL		= 4,	/* call */
+	PERF_BR_IND_CALL	= 5,	/* indirect call */
+	PERF_BR_RET		= 6,	/* return */
+	PERF_BR_SYSCALL		= 7,	/* syscall */
+	PERF_BR_SYSRET		= 8,	/* syscall return */
+	PERF_BR_IRET		= 11,	/* return from interrupt */

2. I wish to keep following definitions for x86.

+	PERF_BR_IRQ		= 9,	/* hw interrupt/trap/fault */
+	PERF_BR_INT		= 10,	/* sw interrupt */

PERF_BR_INT is triggered by instruction "int" .
PERF_BR_IRQ is triggered by interrupts, traps, faults (the ring 0,3 transition).

3. I can drop PERF_BR_FAR_BRANCH

4. I'd like to add following types for powerpc.

	PERF_BR_COND_CALL	/* Conditional call */
	PERF_BR_COND_RET	/* Condition return */

If you agree these new definitions, I will prepare the new patch.

Thanks
Jin Yao

On 7/10/2017 6:32 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:

"Jin, Yao" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On 7/10/2017 2:05 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:

quoted

Jin Yao [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

It is often useful to know the branch types while analyzing branch
data. For example, a call is very different from a conditional branch.

...

quoted

quoted

quoted

To keep consistent on kernel and userspace and make the classification
more common, the patch adds the common branch type classification
in perf_event.h.

Most of the code and doc uses "branch" but then a few these are called
"jump". Can we just stick with "branch"?

quoted

PERF_BR_NONE      : unknown
PERF_BR_JCC       : conditional jump
PERF_BR_JMP       : jump
PERF_BR_IND_JMP   : indirect jump

eg:

PERF_BR_COND    : conditional branch
PERF_BR_UNCOND  : unconditional branch
PERF_BR_IND     : indirect branch

Call and jump are all branches. If we want to figure out which one is
jump and which one is call, we need the detail branch type definitions.

Yeah I'm not saying we don't need the different types, I'm saying I'd
rather we just called them "branch" not "jump". Just because "jump" can
mean different things on different arches.

quoted

For example,  if we only say "PERF_BR_IND", we could not know if it's an
indirect jump or indirect call.

Yes we can, PERF_BR_IND is an indirect branch, which is not a call,
because if it was a call then it would be PERF_BR_IND_CALL.

quoted

quoted

quoted

PERF_BR_CALL      : call
PERF_BR_IND_CALL  : indirect call
PERF_BR_RET       : return
PERF_BR_SYSCALL   : syscall
PERF_BR_SYSRET    : syscall return
PERF_BR_IRQ       : hw interrupt/trap/fault
PERF_BR_INT       : sw interrupt

I'm not sure what that means, I'm guessing on x86 it means someone
executed "int" ?

PERF_BR_IRQ is for hw interrupt and PERF_BR_INT is for sw interrupt.

OK, but I still don't know what that means :)

What's an example of an instruction that is PERF_BR_IRQ and PERF_BR_INT ?

quoted

PERF_BR_CALL/PERF_BR_IND_CALL and PERF_BR_RET are for function call
(direct call and indirect call) and return.

Yep makes sense.

quoted

PERF_BR_SYSCALL/PERF_BR_SYSRET are for syscall and syscall return.

Yep OK.

quoted

quoted

Is that sufficiently useful to use up a bit? I think we only have 3
free?

Do you means 3 bits? Each bit stands for one branch type? I guess what
you mean is:

PERF_BR_COND    : conditional branch
PERF_BR_UNCOND  : unconditional branch
PERF_BR_IND     : indirect branch

But 3 branch types are not enough for us.

What I meant was you're using 4 bits for the type, so you have 16
possible values, and you've defined 13 of them. Meaning there are only 3
types free.

So we should try to only define branch types that are really useful, and
keep some free for future use.

Maybe PERF_BR_INT is really common on x86 and so it's important to count
it, but like I said above I don't know what it is.

quoted

quoted

quoted

PERF_BR_IRET      : return from interrupt
PERF_BR_FAR_BRANCH: not generic far branch type

What is a "not generic far branch" ?

I don't know what that would mean on powerpc for example.

It's reserved for future using I think.

OK so let's not put it in the Linux API until it's defined?

quoted

quoted

I think the only thing we have on powerpc that's commonly used and that
isn't covered above is branches that decrement a loop counter and then
branch based on the result.

...

quoted

Sorry, I'm not familiar with powerpc arch. Or could you add the branch
type which powerpc needs?

These are good:

+	PERF_BR_COND		= 1,	/* conditional */
+	PERF_BR_UNCOND		= 2,	/* unconditional */
+	PERF_BR_IND		= 3,	/* indirect */
+	PERF_BR_CALL		= 4,	/* call */
+	PERF_BR_IND_CALL	= 5,	/* indirect call */
+	PERF_BR_RET		= 6,	/* return */

These we wouldn't use currently, but make sense:

+	PERF_BR_SYSCALL		= 7,	/* syscall */
+	PERF_BR_SYSRET		= 8,	/* syscall return */
+	PERF_BR_IRET		= 11,	/* return from interrupt */

These I'm not so sure about, I don't really know what they would map to
for us:

+	PERF_BR_IRQ		= 9,	/* hw interrupt/trap/fault */
+	PERF_BR_INT		= 10,	/* sw interrupt */

And sounds like this should be dropped for now:

+	PERF_BR_FAR_BRANCH	= 12,	/* not generic far branch type */

The branch types you haven't covered which might be useful for us are:

	PERF_BR_COND_CALL	/* Conditional call */
	PERF_BR_COND_RET	/* Condition return */


cheers