[PATCH v5 1/2] riscv: perf: add guest vs host distinction

[Palmer Dabbelt]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 01:42:50 PDT (-0700), zhouquan at iscas.ac.cn wrote:
> From: Quan Zhou <zhouquan at iscas.ac.cn>
>
> Introduce basic guest support in perf, enabling it to distinguish
> between PMU interrupts in the host or guest, and collect
> fundamental information.
>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones at ventanamicro.com>
> Signed-off-by: Quan Zhou <zhouquan at iscas.ac.cn>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/include/asm/perf_event.h |  6 +++++
>  arch/riscv/kernel/perf_callchain.c  | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 44 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/perf_event.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/perf_event.h
> index 665bbc9b2f84..38926b4a902d 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/perf_event.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/perf_event.h
> @@ -8,7 +8,11 @@
>  #ifndef _ASM_RISCV_PERF_EVENT_H
>  #define _ASM_RISCV_PERF_EVENT_H
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
>  #include <linux/perf_event.h>
> +extern unsigned long perf_instruction_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs);
> +extern unsigned long perf_misc_flags(struct pt_regs *regs);
> +#define perf_misc_flags(regs) perf_misc_flags(regs)
>  #define perf_arch_bpf_user_pt_regs(regs) (struct user_regs_struct *)regs
>
>  #define perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs(regs, __ip) { \
> @@ -17,4 +21,6 @@
>  	(regs)->sp = current_stack_pointer; \
>  	(regs)->status = SR_PP; \
>  }
> +#endif
> +
>  #endif /* _ASM_RISCV_PERF_EVENT_H */
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/perf_callchain.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/perf_callchain.c
> index c7468af77c66..c2c81a80f816 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/perf_callchain.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/perf_callchain.c
> @@ -28,11 +28,49 @@ static bool fill_callchain(void *entry, unsigned long pc)
>  void perf_callchain_user(struct perf_callchain_entry_ctx *entry,
>  			 struct pt_regs *regs)
>  {
> +	if (perf_guest_state()) {
> +		/* TODO: We don't support guest os callchain now */
> +		return;

That seems kind of weird, but it looks like almost exactly the same 
thing Marc did in 75e424620a4f ("arm64: perf: add guest vs host 
discrimination").  I think it's safe, as we'll basically just silently 
display no backtrace and we can always just fail to backtrace.

That said: I don't understand why we can't backtrace inside a guest?  If 
we can get the registers and memory it seems like we should be able to.  
Maybe I'm missing something?

> +	}
> +
>  	arch_stack_walk_user(fill_callchain, entry, regs);
>  }
>
>  void perf_callchain_kernel(struct perf_callchain_entry_ctx *entry,
>  			   struct pt_regs *regs)
>  {
> +	if (perf_guest_state()) {
> +		/* TODO: We don't support guest os callchain now */
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
>  	walk_stackframe(NULL, regs, fill_callchain, entry);
>  }
> +
> +unsigned long perf_instruction_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> +	if (perf_guest_state())
> +		return perf_guest_get_ip();
> +
> +	return instruction_pointer(regs);
> +}
> +
> +unsigned long perf_misc_flags(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> +	unsigned int guest_state = perf_guest_state();
> +	unsigned long misc = 0;
> +
> +	if (guest_state) {
> +		if (guest_state & PERF_GUEST_USER)
> +			misc |= PERF_RECORD_MISC_GUEST_USER;
> +		else
> +			misc |= PERF_RECORD_MISC_GUEST_KERNEL;
> +	} else {
> +		if (user_mode(regs))
> +			misc |= PERF_RECORD_MISC_USER;
> +		else
> +			misc |= PERF_RECORD_MISC_KERNEL;
> +	}
> +
> +	return misc;
> +}