Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add SNAX specific events to the tracing script #254

Open
wants to merge 13 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AntonLydike
Copy link
Collaborator

@AntonLydike AntonLydike commented Sep 23, 2024

Adds SNAX specific event tracer to the trace_to_perfetto utilty:

The following three events are discerned to produce those traces:

  • a "pre-launch" event, that:
    - starts at the first CSR write to a config register
    - ends after all launch fields have been written to
    - records the number of setup instructions executed
  • a "launched but not waiting" event, that:
    - starts immediately after the "pre-launch" event
    - ends on the second "write 0 to launch addr"
  • a "waiting" event, that:
    - starts on the first read from the barrier address
    - ends when that read return 1

This should be general enough to support any SNAX accelerator, although I (@JosseVanDelm) am not entirely sure how to verify that in CI.

The utility was already useable standalone, but this patch makes it more difficult to specify a bunch of options that are invalid.

  • You can now use --sequential to run the tracer in sequential mode, which is useful for debugging with pdb.
  • You can use --accelerator to specify a SNAX accelerator in order to activate the SNAX specific event tracer (this functionality is also now available for process_traces in SNAXBenchmark.
  • Kernel annotation is now optional with --annotate-kernels and the tool will warn you if you do not specify the --elf-file and the --addr2line executable

Important note:
In perfetto you might want to change your time format to be anything but timecode, because otherwise it seems to mess up the numbers (not sure why, and also not sure how we can change that default behaviour)
image

@JosseVanDelm JosseVanDelm marked this pull request as ready for review November 14, 2024 17:54
@JosseVanDelm JosseVanDelm requested review from JosseVanDelm and jorendumoulin and removed request for JosseVanDelm November 14, 2024 17:55
@JosseVanDelm
Copy link
Contributor

@AntonLydike I rebased this, found a few errors, and added some functionality


# if state is None, check if we are setting up, if so, switch state to "setting up"
if self.state is None:
if (ins.csr in self.fields) or (ins.csr in self.launch_fields):
Copy link
Contributor

@JosseVanDelm JosseVanDelm Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This was a bit wrong before 😄 :

            if ins.csr in self.fields or self.launch_fields:

Which is almost always true 😅

@JosseVanDelm
Copy link
Contributor

@AntonLydike I can not request a review from you, but I'd appreciate it if you could have a look at this :)

@JosseVanDelm JosseVanDelm self-requested a review November 14, 2024 17:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants