From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Milian Wolff Subject: Re: perf report: fix off-by-one for non-activation frames Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:13:11 +0200 Message-ID: <1916323.ygRLzu1ryd@agathebauer> References: <20170515150444.6841-1-milian.wolff@kdab.com> <20170617080402.GA1402@host1.jankratochvil.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170617080402.GA1402@host1.jankratochvil.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Namhyung Kim , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-perf-users , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , David Ahern , Peter Zijlstra , Yao Jin , Jiri Olsa List-Id: linux-perf-users.vger.kernel.org On Samstag, 17. Juni 2017 10:04:02 CEST Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 09:56:57 +0200, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > Not sure whether it needs be fixed or not. If we fix it, srcline and > > address would not match so it can give its own confusion to users. > > Ideally it should display an addressof the instruction before the > > address IMHO. > > One can figure million ways how it can behave and each one has its pros and > cons. I was just describing the current behavior of GDB and LLDB which > people are used to already. Personally, I agree with Jan that we should mimick existing tool's behavior. I just fear that it's not trivial to do it with the current code base... -- Milian Wolff | milian.wolff@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - The Qt Experts