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

On Nov 26, 2018, at 6:50 AM, Peter Zijlstra [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 06:13:32PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:

quoted

Hi Peter,

quoted

On Nov 22, 2018, at 1:32 AM, Peter Zijlstra [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:54:57AM -0800, Song Liu wrote:

quoted

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

quoted

quoted

quoted

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?

Right, if the BPF program is still loaded when perf-report runs, symbols 
are available. 

Good, that is not something that was clear. The Changelog seems to imply
we need this new stuff in order to observe symbols.

quoted

quoted

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).

This patch set adds two pieces of information:
1. At the beginning of perf-record, save info of existing BPF programs;
2. Gather information of BPF programs load/unload during perf-record. 

(1) is all in user space. It is necessary to show symbols of BPF program
that are unloaded _after_ perf-record. (2) needs PERF_RECORD_BPF_EVENT 
from the ring buffer. It covers BPF program loaded during perf-record 
(perf record -- bpf_test). 

I'm saying that if you given them symbols; most people won't need any of
that ever.

And just tracking kallsyms is _much_ cheaper than either 1 or 2. Alexei
was talking fairly big amounts of data per BPF prog. Dumping and saving
that sounds like pointless overhead for 99% of the users.

If annotation is not needed, we have the option to reduce the amount of 
data per bpf prog by not requesting JITed binaries. Would a flag to tune
this solve the concern of dumping and saving too much data?

Thanks,
Song