Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1687644
| From | Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1 |
| Date | 2017-07-14 22:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u3fea-8p4-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <u3dcm-75z-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <u3f4u-8lt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017, Alexander Shishkin wrote: > Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu> writes: > > > I was tracking down some regressions in my perf_event_test testsuite. > > Some of the tests broke in the 4.11-rc1 timeframe. > > > > I've bisected one of them, this report is about > > tests/overflow/simul_oneshot_group_overflow > > This test creates an event group containing two sampling events, set > > to overflow to a signal handler (which disables and then refreshes the > > event). > > > > On a good kernel you get the following: > > Event perf::instructions with period 1000000 > > Event perf::instructions with period 2000000 > > fd 3 overflows: 946 (perf::instructions/1000000) > > fd 4 overflows: 473 (perf::instructions/2000000) > > Ending counts: > > Count 0: 946379875 > > Count 1: 946365218 > > > > With the broken kernels you get: > > Event perf::instructions with period 1000000 > > Event perf::instructions with period 2000000 > > fd 3 overflows: 938 (perf::instructions/1000000) > > fd 4 overflows: 318 (perf::instructions/2000000) > > Ending counts: > > Count 0: 946373080 > > Count 1: 653373058 > > I'm not sure I'm seeing it (granted, it's a friday evening): is it the > difference in overflow counts? It's two things. It's created an grouped event, with the two events both perf::instructions. 1. The total count at the end should be the same for both (on the failing kernels it is not) 2. The overflow count for both events should be roughly total_events/sample_freq. (on the failing kernels it is not) > Also, are they cpu or task bound? The open looks like this: perf_event_open(&pe,0,-1,-1,0); On the failing case, the group leader is pinned. The source code for the test is here: https://github.com/deater/perf_event_tests/blob/master/tests/overflow/simul_oneshot_group_overflow.c Vince
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1 Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu> - 2017-07-14 20:10 +0200
Re: perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1 Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu> - 2017-07-14 20:30 +0200
Re: perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1 Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com> - 2017-07-14 22:10 +0200
Re: perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1 Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu> - 2017-07-14 22:20 +0200
Re: perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1 Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-07-15 13:10 +0200
Re: perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1 Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu> - 2017-07-15 16:40 +0200
Re: perf: bisected sampling bug in Linux 4.11-rc1 Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu> - 2017-07-16 05:10 +0200
csiph-web