linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
To: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: Mark Wielaard <mjw@redhat.com>,
	Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] perf probe fixes for ppc64le
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:16:57 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <570EEF89.5080107@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1460451721.git.naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>



On 12/04/16 19:10, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> This patchset fixes three issues found with perf probe on ppc64le:
> 1. 'perf test kallsyms' failure on ppc64le (reported by Michael
> Ellerman). This was due to the symbols being fixed up during symbol
> table load. This is fixed in patch 2 by delaying symbol fixup until
> later.
> 2. perf probe function offset was being calculated from the local entry
> point (LEP), which does not match user expectation when trying to look
> at function disassembly output (reported by Ananth N). This is fixed for
> kallsyms in patch 1 and for symbol table in patch 2.
> 3. perf probe failure with kretprobe when using kallsyms. This was
> failing as we were specifying an offset. This is fixed in patch 1.
> 
> A few examples demonstrating the issues and the fix:
> 

Given the choices, I think this makes sense

Acked-by: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-04-14  1:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-12  9:10 [PATCH v2 0/2] perf probe fixes for ppc64le Naveen N. Rao
2016-04-12  9:10 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] perf tools: Fix kprobe and kretprobe handling with kallsyms on ppc64le Naveen N. Rao
2016-04-12  9:10 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] perf tools: Fix kallsyms perf test " Naveen N. Rao
2016-04-14  1:16 ` Balbir Singh [this message]
2016-04-27 16:20 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] perf probe fixes for ppc64le Naveen N. Rao

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=570EEF89.5080107@gmail.com \
    --to=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=acme@redhat.com \
    --cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=mjw@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).