[PATCH v5 4/7] start/stop btrace with coresight etm and collect etm buffer on linux os

[Metzger, Markus T]

Hello Zied,

> All that perf_event setup code looks very similar to PT.  Could we share
> all that?
> [Zied] Yes, there is a lot of similarity in getting the file descriptor out of the syscall and the mmaped file etc.. the difference is in the attributes settings and later on the in setting btrace_tinfo_pt or btrace_tinfo_etm etc... which requires passing a lot of parameters. Therefore I opted to have two dedicated functions.

They agree on the fields related to perf so we can capture those
in a separate structure.

And we could have the caller fill in the perf attributes.  The rest
should be identical.

> +  conf->etm_trace_params = new std::vector<cs_etm_trace_params>;
> +  for (int i = 0; i < conf->cpu_count; i++)
> +    {
> +      fill_etm_trace_params (&etm_trace_params,i);
> 
> Can this throw?  We just allocated memory.
> [Zied] Yes, new can throw a std::bad_alloc. If we would like to have a graceful continuation of gdb when we fail in new, then we will have to catch it. Otherwise we ignore it and we let it crash gdb.
> Which behaviour do we want to have here?

I was asking about fill_etm_trace_params ().  We're not using unique_ptr
to store the vector so it would be leaked on an exception.

Do we need to allocate that vector on the heap, at all?


> +/* Branch trace target information for ARM CoreSight ETM Trace.  */
> +struct btrace_tinfo_etm
> +{
> +  /* The Linux perf_event configuration for collecting the branch trace.  */
> +  struct perf_event_attr attr;
> +
> +  /* The perf event file.  */
> +  int file;
> +
> +  /* The perf event configuration page.  */
> +  volatile struct perf_event_mmap_page *header;
> +
> +  /* The trace perf event buffer.  */
> +  struct perf_event_buffer etm;
> +};
> 
> Maybe we can share that, too.
> [Zied] Yes. This should be basically possible, we have to rename "struct perf_event_buffer etm/pt"  to "struct perf_event_buffer buffer", and change its occurrences. shall we go for it in this patch set or in a different one?

I think BTS is using the same fields, too, so we could change this
also in a separate patch.  The configuration is different between
PT and BTS, though.  BTS is collected in the perf buffer, whereas
PT is collected in the AUX buffer and we ignore the perf buffer.
ETM seems similar to PT in this regard.

I'm fine either way.

Regards,
Markus.
Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de <http://www.intel.de>
Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Sharon Heck, Tiffany Doon Silva  
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928