Thread (18 messages) flat view 18 messages, 6 authors, 2018-11-27

Re: [PATCH perf,bpf 0/5] reveal invisible bpf programs

From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2018-11-22 09:32:38
Also in: lkml

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:54:57AM -0800, Song Liu wrote:
Changes RFC -> PATCH v1:

1. In perf-record, poll vip events in a separate thread;
2. Add tag to bpf prog name;
3. Small refactorings.

Original cover letter (with minor revisions):

This is to follow up Alexei's early effort to show bpf programs

   https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg524232.html

In this version, PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT is introduced to send real time BPF
load/unload events to user space. In user space, perf-record is modified
to listen to these events (through a dedicated ring buffer) and generate
detailed information about the program (struct bpf_prog_info_event). Then,
perf-report translates these events into proper symbols.

With this set, perf-report will show bpf program as:

   18.49%     0.16%  test  [kernel.vmlinux]    [k] ksys_write
   18.01%     0.47%  test  [kernel.vmlinux]    [k] vfs_write
   17.02%     0.40%  test  bpf_prog            [k] bpf_prog_07367f7ba80df72b_
   16.97%     0.10%  test  [kernel.vmlinux]    [k] __vfs_write
   16.86%     0.12%  test  [kernel.vmlinux]    [k] comm_write
   16.67%     0.39%  test  [kernel.vmlinux]    [k] bpf_probe_read

Note that, the program name is still work in progress, it will be cleaner
with function types in BTF.

Please share your comments on this.
So I see:

  kernel/bpf/core.c:void bpf_prog_kallsyms_add(struct bpf_prog *fp)

which should already provide basic symbol information for extant eBPF
programs, right?

And (AFAIK) perf uses /proc/kcore for annotate on the current running
kernel (if not, it really should, given alternatives, jump_labels and
all other other self-modifying code).

So this fancy new stuff is only for the case where your profile spans
eBPF load/unload events (which should be relatively rare in the normal
case, right), or when you want source annotated asm output (I normally
don't bother with that).

That is; I would really like this fancy stuff to be an optional extra
that is typically not needed.

Does that make sense?
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help