On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:39:23PM +0000, Alexandre Truong wrote:
> Previously, this command returns no help message on aarch64:
> 
>   -> ./perf record --user-regs=?
> 
>   available registers:
>   Usage: perf record [<options>] [<command>]
>       or: perf record [<options>] -- <command> [<options>]
> 
> With this change, the registers are listed.
> 
>   -> ./perf record --user-regs=?
> 
>   available registers: x0 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7 x8 x9 x10 x11 x12 x13 x14 x15 
> x16 x17 x18 x19 x20 x21 x22 x23 x24 x25 x26 x27 x28 x29 lr sp pc
> 
> It's also now possible to record subsets of registers on aarch64:
> 
>   -> ./perf record --user-regs=x4,x5 ls
>   -> ./perf report --dump-raw-trace
> 
>   12801163749305260 0xc70 [0x40]: PERF_RECORD_SAMPLE(IP, 0x2): 51956/51956: 
> 0xffffaa6571f0 period: 145785 addr: 0
>   ... user regs: mask 0x30 ABI 64-bit
>   .... x4    0x000000000000006c
>   .... x5    0x0000001001000001
>    ... thread: ls:51956
>     ...... dso: /usr/lib64/ld-2.17.so

Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo....@linaro.org>

Except this patch for enabling registers on aarch64, it's good to add
arm32's version in the file arch/arm/util/perf_regs.c.

Just note for a side topic, I checked a bit for the implementation for
x86/powerpc, you could consider to enable Statically Defined Tracing
in the perf_regs.c file as well.  This can be separate task for
arm/arm64.

Thanks,
Leo

> Cc: John Garry <john.ga...@huawei.com>
> Cc: Leo Yan <leo....@linaro.org>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <a...@kernel.org>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jo...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Truong <alexandre.tru...@arm.com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/perf_regs.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/perf_regs.c 
> b/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/perf_regs.c
> index 2833e101a..54efa12fd 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/perf_regs.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/perf_regs.c
> @@ -2,5 +2,38 @@
>  #include "../../../util/perf_regs.h"
>  
>  const struct sample_reg sample_reg_masks[] = {
> +     SMPL_REG(x0, PERF_REG_ARM64_X0),
> +     SMPL_REG(x1, PERF_REG_ARM64_X1),
> +     SMPL_REG(x2, PERF_REG_ARM64_X2),
> +     SMPL_REG(x3, PERF_REG_ARM64_X3),
> +     SMPL_REG(x4, PERF_REG_ARM64_X4),
> +     SMPL_REG(x5, PERF_REG_ARM64_X5),
> +     SMPL_REG(x6, PERF_REG_ARM64_X6),
> +     SMPL_REG(x7, PERF_REG_ARM64_X7),
> +     SMPL_REG(x8, PERF_REG_ARM64_X8),
> +     SMPL_REG(x9, PERF_REG_ARM64_X9),
> +     SMPL_REG(x10, PERF_REG_ARM64_X10),
> +     SMPL_REG(x11, PERF_REG_ARM64_X11),
> +     SMPL_REG(x12, PERF_REG_ARM64_X12),
> +     SMPL_REG(x13, PERF_REG_ARM64_X13),
> +     SMPL_REG(x14, PERF_REG_ARM64_X14),
> +     SMPL_REG(x15, PERF_REG_ARM64_X15),
> +     SMPL_REG(x16, PERF_REG_ARM64_X16),
> +     SMPL_REG(x17, PERF_REG_ARM64_X17),
> +     SMPL_REG(x18, PERF_REG_ARM64_X18),
> +     SMPL_REG(x19, PERF_REG_ARM64_X19),
> +     SMPL_REG(x20, PERF_REG_ARM64_X20),
> +     SMPL_REG(x21, PERF_REG_ARM64_X21),
> +     SMPL_REG(x22, PERF_REG_ARM64_X22),
> +     SMPL_REG(x23, PERF_REG_ARM64_X23),
> +     SMPL_REG(x24, PERF_REG_ARM64_X24),
> +     SMPL_REG(x25, PERF_REG_ARM64_X25),
> +     SMPL_REG(x26, PERF_REG_ARM64_X26),
> +     SMPL_REG(x27, PERF_REG_ARM64_X27),
> +     SMPL_REG(x28, PERF_REG_ARM64_X28),
> +     SMPL_REG(x29, PERF_REG_ARM64_X29),
> +     SMPL_REG(lr, PERF_REG_ARM64_LR),
> +     SMPL_REG(sp, PERF_REG_ARM64_SP),
> +     SMPL_REG(pc, PERF_REG_ARM64_PC),
>       SMPL_REG_END
>  };
> -- 
> 2.23.0
> 

Reply via email to