From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf test shell: Fix check open filename arg using 'perf trace' Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 12:16:28 -0300 Message-ID: <20171201151628.GB3298@kernel.org> References: <84d4a40a-dfbf-6d9b-9eb2-6912dc6f57e4@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171130155642.GA2893@redhat.com> <20171201023314.GC30867@sejong> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:53684 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750964AbdLAPQc (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:16:32 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171201023314.GC30867@sejong> Sender: linux-perf-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Namhyung Kim Cc: Arnaldo de Melo , Thomas-Mich Richter , Michael Petlan , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa , kernel-team@lge.com Em Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 11:33:14AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:56:42PM -0200, Arnaldo de Melo wrote: > > Em Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:28:33AM +0100, Thomas-Mich Richter escreveu: > > > On 11/29/2017 06:27 PM, Michael Petlan wrote: > > > > The commit f231af789b11a2f1a3795acc3228a3e178a80c21 adds an exception for s390x to > > > > use openat() syscall instead of open(). This exception is not s390x-only, thus I > > > > adjusted the test to accept both open and openat syscalls, no matter which arch it > > > > runs on. Does it sound reasonable to you? > It seems glibc 2.26 changed the behavior: > https://lwn.net/Articles/738694/ interesting > > What differs from x86 to others is that x86 uses syscalltbl, not requiring > > audit-libs to map syscall numbers to names, so perhaps it is something in there... > If it only needs to consider open or openat, why not specifying the > both directly? > # perf trace -e open -e openat touch /etc/passwd Same effect, works with other perf trace versions, but one suggestion to make it shorter: perf trace -e open,openat touch /etc/passwd Does the same thing :-) Michael, can you please take that into account and resubmit the patch? - Arnaldo