From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DF5D3612C3; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 18:24:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763490270; cv=none; b=Xjb5XZ5pSdFAAO8fSySEUvznlRFCT9uVeg9EBkrfGc+EDdqvnBjMJ7un1Ad5NriK5WrsjExtWavWscrDRdSk1xVomVzsbcF+vdgq09UanvV/SBv3X7X/MA9lj4iueZ927z+OVvsOvWaKoyBFXo8iFTiJqYKIOv1yNlm6u6U2u4I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763490270; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LSlHntltsTV36A1h1K5uzQJTWSBBUVOJyg/Y2B5k0Zs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=pAUXm7386kwQ/rT0++aAmEvDHlsc0O4PQRO6y5h2fbTzjAmWLvIg9oPPG9zxHQc/PMTKZ48Yrpgf9cfd7sWa+e70rbEHm4OH6NF2oVAOUj6Ffc4kLc1gK0ixNVaXdPhuYgKxbEYmU6lo2WXmK79c2ptFuPgABhZGZDnUsfW7wLI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org Received: from omf10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B057CC0177; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 18:24:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: rostedt@goodmis.org) by omf10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 672A445; Tue, 18 Nov 2025 18:24:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 13:24:51 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Namhyung Kim Cc: Thomas Richter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, acme@kernel.org, agordeev@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, sumanthk@linux.ibm.com, hca@linux.ibm.com, japo@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH Linux-next] perf test: Fix test case perf trace BTF general tests Message-ID: <20251118132451.29a35127@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: References: <20251117124359.75604-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.20.0git84 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 672A445 X-Stat-Signature: p7myfnwem55yoc514tzghwepch5ca7tj X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout02 X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX19tj3XR/by1M9LTk1T9jVObJN+GMLztGME= X-HE-Tag: 1763490264-773014 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX19ONDLr6RVVLjhwI1idVWGXWh1Tgbi0kzLE9cXFXMyOWZRcfG17ySjurgHx4x4l0MykFX7ZhB7tXkVs8EJO+EMTH12lVWEBMEa8GizvGRtFWcpiwKtRy/XHhWxgLccFKczxvboDhMzMZnDJJ+9Laq98qIFBBSN2gO2XuJa7rDWnVD6Ba/3XFaoFXgEB2xxVxFZfBI/Zl47aD54uC6flpsC8PJWCHewb1YpVjAZfgotiGMWcazp1/NOwCcIP4AtShKzyaC5DbJOck1JXdhxLQJ4ZvTHVYCtYLUatUghVS2Gy8x15gigLurjavR/tmYzaaLxyr4zSyWBXT81Lq9b5WUa4 On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 22:43:21 -0800 Namhyung Kim wrote: > > bash-5.3# uname -a > > Linux f43 6.18.0-rc5-next-20251114tmr-n #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Mon Nov 17 11:24:02 CET 2025 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > bash-5.3# cat /sys/kernel/tracing/events/syscalls/sys_enter_write/format > > name: sys_enter_write > > ID: 758 > > format: > > field:unsigned short common_type; offset:0; size:2; signed:0; > > field:unsigned char common_flags; offset:2; size:1; signed:0; > > field:unsigned char common_preempt_count; offset:3; size:1; signed:0; > > field:int common_pid; offset:4; size:4; signed:1; > > > > field:int __syscall_nr; offset:8; size:4; signed:1; > > field:unsigned int fd; offset:16; size:8; signed:0; > > field:const char * buf; offset:24; size:8; signed:0; > > field:size_t count; offset:32; size:8; signed:0; > > field:__data_loc char[] __buf_val; offset:40; size:4; signed:0; > > Indeed, I see this new field __buf_val. > > Steve, is this what you added recently for taking user contents? Yes. > Hmm.. this makes perf trace confused wrt the syscall parameters. > Is it always __buf_val or has any patterns? Really? It still uses libtraceevent right? I made sure that this didn't break trace-cmd and thought that perf would work too. -- Steve