Re: [Xen-devel] xenoprof patch for oprofile-0.9.7

[William Cohen <wcohen@redhat.com>]

On 12/21/2011 10:43 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 04:44:53PM -0500, William Cohen wrote:
>> On 12/16/2011 04:09 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 04:28:06PM -0500, William Cohen wrote:
>>>> On 11/28/2011 05:45 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 05:09:34PM -0500, William Cohen wrote:
>>>>>> I am rebasing Fedora rawhide oprofile package to oprofile-0.9.7. The xenoprof patches on http://xenoprof.sourceforge.net/#download look a bit dated. The newest version is for oprofile-0.9.5. 
>>>>>
>>>>> There was one posted some time ago.. Ah:
>>>>> http://www.flyn.org/patches/linux-xen-passive-oprofile/linux-3.0-xen-passive-oprofile.patch.gz
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that ones works , thought I haven't had a chance to test it
>>>>> myself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I massaged the patch oprofile-0.9.5-xen.patch to apply to oprofile-.0.9.7. Attached is that updated patch. Does this look reasonable? Is there a desire to get this into upstream oprofile? Or should the xenoprof patch be dropped?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, the desire is to get a performance tool in upstream that works
>>>>> with Xen very very very much.
>>>>>
>>>>> The upstream is using the 'perf' framework which is different from oprofile
>>>>> and there hasn't been any patches to take advantage of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> So to answer your question:
>>>>>  1). Its awesome you have posted a patch. Will need to spend some time
>>>>>      with it and and with the version that was posted to see if there is
>>>>>      something missing. Sadly, the kernel patch is not very
>>>>>      upstream-compatible as is. But it will get to folks be able to
>>>>>      do some perf analysis instead of using benchmark tools.
>>>>
>>>> If anyone can exercise the patch and verify that it works well with the current upstream xen, that would be greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>> So I tried to do it today but running in trouble of compiling it on
>>> Fedora Core 16. You wouldn't have any patches floating around to make it
>>> compile? (I used first a virgin 0.9.7 version).
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>
>> Hi Konrad,
>>
>> Sorry I didn't see this email earlier. 
> 
> That is OK.
>>
>> The patch applies cleanly to oprofile 0.9.7 and builds on fc17. What was the error you got?  How are you configuring it? You should be able to do something like:
> 
> Well, I was getting some errors about the wrong header files, but now
> that started it again the errors don't show up.
> 
> Could be that I had installed the required libraries/headers in between
> when I had the problem and now, but can't recall.
> 
> Should get you some details soon to your question. Thanks!

Hi Konrad,

Glad to hear that oprofile built successfully. One trick that I have done in the past is get the source rpm for a package and then do a "yum-builddep <path-to-srpm>" to make sure that everything needed is installed on the machine before doing development work on the package.

Look forward to the feedback on this version of oprofile.

-Will

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Write once. Port to many.
Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create 
new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the 
Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev