From patchwork Thu Apr 27 23:48:33 2023 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Namhyung Kim X-Patchwork-Id: 13225865 X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3075FC77B61 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 23:49:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1344447AbjD0Xs5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2023 19:48:57 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49996 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1344235AbjD0Xsj (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2023 19:48:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x42a.google.com (mail-pf1-x42a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 336E61FF5; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:48:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-63b7b54642cso6491808b3a.0; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:48:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1682639318; x=1685231318; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=ZNOWzjzDN8/IL6kFuuC3MOAdiIjEwK+a4rVMlscXpEU=; b=Dy7KxEsSsT4BcpH9K6b7Bs+cMCFyYE7TTBHgYFYjQ+mDHmmEDEU9IOttf5pPaZ1bJ5 z8m5jSGjO573huyo5zG7pA4Q14nWilvb35KzW6HFdRPALYZEnCqpt/YeXb61HwrsWVyR P2LgiH92QNwB5cLsxbzcJb7dQD8oTmqkoSVmjAb4aosfoQP7AvrsHOovgixa6Ui00hRj XhIcXf78a7NBr8mZW4u2pFW35l4UjEkXFuQ1pouT6JzfZmAE0x5QXhWgz38qhLmz2gQN 7LpHDF/hjaBqtaPrnESEriRZzn6gawMAkamuNwHq+V3Xw2zc4xPCxJuRqQBqz8su1rbH u5GQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682639318; x=1685231318; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:sender:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ZNOWzjzDN8/IL6kFuuC3MOAdiIjEwK+a4rVMlscXpEU=; b=GgE2b5KOuP2Csv05tVln/FZuO2uh7ayktKswz5m1mD+Ke+JY71/QES+RaJHsF+80JX yG72AbBfbL9JTB0ypbFxLbW9gUvV09jFSHGcmfd9azjYK3AuZO9jsrycP8uWA7k/PCnC lf0k3G5vl2kDZzHvObRNHpgvvOxNU6roLI+m+Hvqyzlc8ObyJEgT3E+pBiH2vMmupVhN dP69X8AWVQ96M4est5v0X8pV8xtDuCcAj5psbS/K7BhG60FzJiVkAQVPvzVEZBMd5nrK or94XVt2ptKAkyxeVeCa2dQ2Xan/CaUSM1m5Easph7FwVJp/n8xaHYaApbj+AEHlqn57 W2Zg== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzcU6dFE72FM0+hCuyzZveohXWdKn0aztvJvSJyDs7qlrP/qiGr 8GlHmFddqsbAo+dP+H1GtY8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4loax0r2ryQ/NZLnyN+uRJNYa/sl5VGC+6EMy431qxGiQy5fee6GUa+agQ7duwis9GuJGimA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:24c4:b0:640:f220:d16e with SMTP id d4-20020a056a0024c400b00640f220d16emr5154594pfv.11.1682639318519; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from moohyul.svl.corp.google.com ([2620:15c:2d4:203:55cd:594d:edb:e780]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p5-20020a056a000b4500b0062a56e51fd7sm13769425pfo.188.2023.04.27.16.48.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Namhyung Kim From: Namhyung Kim To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jiri Olsa Cc: Ian Rogers , Adrian Hunter , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , LKML , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, Andrii Nakryiko , Hao Luo , Song Liu , Andrii Nakryiko Subject: [PATCH 2/2] perf lock contention: Rework offset calculation with BPF CO-RE Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:48:33 -0700 Message-ID: <20230427234833.1576130-2-namhyung@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.40.1.495.gc816e09b53d-goog In-Reply-To: <20230427234833.1576130-1-namhyung@kernel.org> References: <20230427234833.1576130-1-namhyung@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org It seems BPF CO-RE reloc doesn't work well with the pattern that gets the field-offset only. Use offsetof() to make it explicit so that the compiler would generate the correct code. Fixes: 0c1228486bef ("perf lock contention: Support pre-5.14 kernels") Co-developed-by: Andrii Nakryiko Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim Acked-by: Ian Rogers --- tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/lock_contention.bpf.c | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/lock_contention.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/lock_contention.bpf.c index 30c193078bdb..8d3cfbb3cc65 100644 --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/lock_contention.bpf.c +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/lock_contention.bpf.c @@ -429,21 +429,21 @@ struct rq___new { SEC("raw_tp/bpf_test_finish") int BPF_PROG(collect_lock_syms) { - __u64 lock_addr; + __u64 lock_addr, lock_off; __u32 lock_flag; + if (bpf_core_field_exists(struct rq___new, __lock)) + lock_off = offsetof(struct rq___new, __lock); + else + lock_off = offsetof(struct rq___old, lock); + for (int i = 0; i < MAX_CPUS; i++) { struct rq *rq = bpf_per_cpu_ptr(&runqueues, i); - struct rq___new *rq_new = (void *)rq; - struct rq___old *rq_old = (void *)rq; if (rq == NULL) break; - if (bpf_core_field_exists(rq_new->__lock)) - lock_addr = (__u64)&rq_new->__lock; - else - lock_addr = (__u64)&rq_old->lock; + lock_addr = (__u64)(void *)rq + lock_off; lock_flag = LOCK_CLASS_RQLOCK; bpf_map_update_elem(&lock_syms, &lock_addr, &lock_flag, BPF_ANY); }