From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: perf: multiple mmap of fd behavior on x86/ARM
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 18:09:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170811170921.GC22445@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708111244570.2445@macbook-air>
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:51:12PM -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2017, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > Just to check, how does x86 behave on each of those kernel releases?
> >
> > Many things have changed since v4.4.
>
> I'm fairly sure this test (well, the equivelent code in
> tests/record_sample/record_mmap that I based the test on) has been passing
> on all of my x86 test machines since ~3.10 or so, or else I would noticed.
Ok.
> If I can get a custom kernel to boot on one of my machines I can start
> digging in and see if I can find where the EINVAL comes from.
>From a quick scan, I can't spot anything obvious that would affect the
arm64 perf mmap behaviour, that has changed since v4.9.
> This isn't some key thing that needs to be fixed, I was just curious about
> the behavior difference between x86 and ARM.
Sure; likewise I'm curious.
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-11 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-10 18:48 perf: multiple mmap of fd behavior on x86/ARM Vince Weaver
2017-08-11 10:01 ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-11 10:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 11:06 ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-11 14:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-14 10:57 ` Will Deacon
2017-08-11 15:25 ` Vince Weaver
2017-08-11 16:23 ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-11 16:51 ` Vince Weaver
2017-08-11 17:09 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2017-08-11 19:01 ` Vince Weaver
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170811170921.GC22445@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.weaver@maine.edu \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.