perf: Generalize perf lock's sample event reordering to the session layer

The sample events recorded by perf record are not time ordered
because we have one buffer per cpu for each event (even demultiplexed
per task/per cpu for task bound events). But when we read trace events
we want them to be ordered by time because many state machines are
involved.

There are currently two ways perf tools deal with that:

- use -M to multiplex every buffers (perf sched, perf kmem)
  But this creates a lot of contention in SMP machines on
  record time.

- use a post-processing time reordering (perf timechart, perf lock)
  The reordering used by timechart is simple but doesn't scale well
  with huge flow of events, in terms of performance and memory use
  (unusable with perf lock for example).
  Perf lock has its own samples reordering that flushes its memory
  use in a regular basis and that uses a sorting based on the
  previous event queued (a new event to be queued is close to the
  previous one most of the time).

This patch proposes to export perf lock's samples reordering facility
to the session layer that reads the events. So if a tool wants to
get ordered sample events, it needs to set its
struct perf_event_ops::ordered_samples to true and that's it.

This prepares tracing based perf tools to get rid of the need to
use buffers multiplexing (-M) or to implement their own
reordering.

Also lower the flush period to 2 as it's sufficient already.

Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>
Cc: Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@gmail.com>

1 files changed, 178 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/session.c b/tools/perf/util/session.c
index 7d88ae5c270f..b7aade2184b2 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/session.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/session.c
@@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ struct perf_session *perf_session__new(const char *filename, int mode, bool forc
 	self->cwdlen = 0;
 	self->unknown_events = 0;
 	self->kerninfo_root = RB_ROOT;
+	self->ordered_samples.flush_limit = ULLONG_MAX;
+	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&self->ordered_samples.samples_head);
 
 	if (mode == O_RDONLY) {
 		if (perf_session__open(self, force) < 0)
@@ -351,6 +353,178 @@ static event__swap_op event__swap_ops[] = {
 	[PERF_RECORD_HEADER_MAX]    = NULL,
 };
 
+struct sample_queue {
+	u64			timestamp;
+	struct sample_event	*event;
+	struct list_head	list;
+};
+
+#define FLUSH_PERIOD	(2 * NSEC_PER_SEC)
+
+static void flush_sample_queue(struct perf_session *s,
+			       struct perf_event_ops *ops)
+{
+	struct list_head *head = &s->ordered_samples.samples_head;
+	u64 limit = s->ordered_samples.flush_limit;
+	struct sample_queue *tmp, *iter;
+
+	if (!ops->ordered_samples)
+		return;
+
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(iter, tmp, head, list) {
+		if (iter->timestamp > limit)
+			return;
+
+		if (iter == s->ordered_samples.last_inserted)
+			s->ordered_samples.last_inserted = NULL;
+
+		ops->sample((event_t *)iter->event, s);
+
+		s->ordered_samples.last_flush = iter->timestamp;
+		list_del(&iter->list);
+		free(iter->event);
+		free(iter);
+	}
+}
+
+static void __queue_sample_end(struct sample_queue *new, struct list_head *head)
+{
+	struct sample_queue *iter;
+
+	list_for_each_entry_reverse(iter, head, list) {
+		if (iter->timestamp < new->timestamp) {
+			list_add(&new->list, &iter->list);
+			return;
+		}
+	}
+
+	list_add(&new->list, head);
+}
+
+static void __queue_sample_before(struct sample_queue *new,
+				  struct sample_queue *iter,
+				  struct list_head *head)
+{
+	list_for_each_entry_continue_reverse(iter, head, list) {
+		if (iter->timestamp < new->timestamp) {
+			list_add(&new->list, &iter->list);
+			return;
+		}
+	}
+
+	list_add(&new->list, head);
+}
+
+static void __queue_sample_after(struct sample_queue *new,
+				 struct sample_queue *iter,
+				 struct list_head *head)
+{
+	list_for_each_entry_continue(iter, head, list) {
+		if (iter->timestamp > new->timestamp) {
+			list_add_tail(&new->list, &iter->list);
+			return;
+		}
+	}
+	list_add_tail(&new->list, head);
+}
+
+/* The queue is ordered by time */
+static void __queue_sample_event(struct sample_queue *new,
+				 struct perf_session *s)
+{
+	struct sample_queue *last_inserted = s->ordered_samples.last_inserted;
+	struct list_head *head = &s->ordered_samples.samples_head;
+
+
+	if (!last_inserted) {
+		__queue_sample_end(new, head);
+		return;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * Most of the time the current event has a timestamp
+	 * very close to the last event inserted, unless we just switched
+	 * to another event buffer. Having a sorting based on a list and
+	 * on the last inserted event that is close to the current one is
+	 * probably more efficient than an rbtree based sorting.
+	 */
+	if (last_inserted->timestamp >= new->timestamp)
+		__queue_sample_before(new, last_inserted, head);
+	else
+		__queue_sample_after(new, last_inserted, head);
+}
+
+static int queue_sample_event(event_t *event, struct sample_data *data,
+			      struct perf_session *s,
+			      struct perf_event_ops *ops)
+{
+	u64 timestamp = data->time;
+	struct sample_queue *new;
+	u64 flush_limit;
+
+
+	if (s->ordered_samples.flush_limit == ULLONG_MAX)
+		s->ordered_samples.flush_limit = timestamp + FLUSH_PERIOD;
+
+	if (timestamp < s->ordered_samples.last_flush) {
+		printf("Warning: Timestamp below last timeslice flush\n");
+		return -EINVAL;
+	}
+
+	new = malloc(sizeof(*new));
+	if (!new)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	new->timestamp = timestamp;
+
+	new->event = malloc(event->header.size);
+	if (!new->event) {
+		free(new);
+		return -ENOMEM;
+	}
+
+	memcpy(new->event, event, event->header.size);
+
+	__queue_sample_event(new, s);
+	s->ordered_samples.last_inserted = new;
+
+	/*
+	 * We want to have a slice of events covering 2 * FLUSH_PERIOD
+	 * If FLUSH_PERIOD is big enough, it ensures every events that occured
+	 * in the first half of the timeslice have all been buffered and there
+	 * are none remaining (we need that because of the weakly ordered
+	 * event recording we have). Then once we reach the 2 * FLUSH_PERIOD
+	 * timeslice, we flush the first half to be gentle with the memory
+	 * (the second half can still get new events in the middle, so wait
+	 * another period to flush it)
+	 */
+	flush_limit = s->ordered_samples.flush_limit;
+
+	if (new->timestamp > flush_limit &&
+		new->timestamp - flush_limit > FLUSH_PERIOD) {
+		s->ordered_samples.flush_limit += FLUSH_PERIOD;
+		flush_sample_queue(s, ops);
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int perf_session__process_sample(event_t *event, struct perf_session *s,
+					struct perf_event_ops *ops)
+{
+	struct sample_data data;
+
+	if (!ops->ordered_samples)
+		return ops->sample(event, s);
+
+	bzero(&data, sizeof(struct sample_data));
+	event__parse_sample(event, s->sample_type, &data);
+
+	queue_sample_event(event, &data, s, ops);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static int perf_session__process_event(struct perf_session *self,
 				       event_t *event,
 				       struct perf_event_ops *ops,
@@ -371,7 +545,7 @@ static int perf_session__process_event(struct perf_session *self,
 
 	switch (event->header.type) {
 	case PERF_RECORD_SAMPLE:
-		return ops->sample(event, self);
+		return perf_session__process_sample(event, self, ops);
 	case PERF_RECORD_MMAP:
 		return ops->mmap(event, self);
 	case PERF_RECORD_COMM:
@@ -611,6 +785,9 @@ more:
 		goto more;
 done:
 	err = 0;
+	/* do the final flush for ordered samples */
+	self->ordered_samples.flush_limit = ULLONG_MAX;
+	flush_sample_queue(self, ops);
 out_err:
 	ui_progress__delete(progress);
 	return err;