Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1593140 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-06 11:00 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-03-06 14:50 +0100 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-03-06 11:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> - 2017-03-06 14:50 +0100
| From | Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-06 11:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc |
| Message-ID | <thXAS-6lr-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530 > Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > >> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has >> couple of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code >> in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix >> b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers >> are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to convert arguments >> having no offset but still surrounds register with parenthesis >> for ex. 8@(%rdi) is converted to +(%di):u64 which is rejected >> by uprobe_events. It's causing failure at 'perf probe' for all >> SDT events on all archs except x86. With this patchset, I've >> solved these issues. (patch 2,3) >> >> Also, existing perf shows misleading message when user tries to >> record sdt event without probing it. I've prepared patch for >> the same. (patch 1) >> >> Apart from that, I've also added logic to support arguments with >> sdt marker on powerpc. (patch 4) >> >> There are cases where uprobe definition of sdt event goes beyond >> current limit MAX_CMDLEN (256) and in such case perf fails with >> seg fault. I've solve this issue. (patch 5) >> >> Note: This patchset is prepared on top of Alexis' v5 series.[1] >> >> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1292251.html > Hmm, I must missed it. I'll check it... > Hi Masami, Can you please review this. Thanks, -Ravi
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-06 14:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ti1bs-uP-41@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1593140 |
On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 13:23:30 +0530 Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530 > > Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > >> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has > >> couple of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code > >> in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix > >> b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers > >> are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to convert arguments > >> having no offset but still surrounds register with parenthesis > >> for ex. 8@(%rdi) is converted to +(%di):u64 which is rejected > >> by uprobe_events. It's causing failure at 'perf probe' for all > >> SDT events on all archs except x86. With this patchset, I've > >> solved these issues. (patch 2,3) > >> > >> Also, existing perf shows misleading message when user tries to > >> record sdt event without probing it. I've prepared patch for > >> the same. (patch 1) > >> > >> Apart from that, I've also added logic to support arguments with > >> sdt marker on powerpc. (patch 4) > >> > >> There are cases where uprobe definition of sdt event goes beyond > >> current limit MAX_CMDLEN (256) and in such case perf fails with > >> seg fault. I've solve this issue. (patch 5) > >> > >> Note: This patchset is prepared on top of Alexis' v5 series.[1] > >> > >> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1292251.html > > Hmm, I must missed it. I'll check it... > > > > Hi Masami, > > Can you please review this. Thanks for kicking me :) -- Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web