From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753270Ab3LZO0l (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Dec 2013 09:26:41 -0500 Received: from mail-qa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.216.48]:35222 "EHLO mail-qa0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753025Ab3LZO0j (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Dec 2013 09:26:39 -0500 Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 11:26:34 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: David Ahern Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephane Eranian Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Do not show stats if workload fails Message-ID: <20131226142634.GF30980@ghostprotocols.net> References: <1387518748-25340-1-git-send-email-dsahern@gmail.com> <20131220075759.GA12937@gmail.com> <20131223193757.GA1396@ghostprotocols.net> <52B8D582.9090009@gmail.com> <20131224125342.GC17780@ghostprotocols.net> <20131224133003.GA23382@ghostprotocols.net> <52BC390A.2000504@gmail.com> <20131226141507.GD30980@ghostprotocols.net> <52BC3AA9.1020404@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52BC3AA9.1020404@gmail.com> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Em Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 09:18:17AM -0500, David Ahern escreveu: > On 12/26/13, 9:15 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > >Right, but I can't apply that patch, as it makes 'perf stat > >whatever-workload' to fail, as I realized when doing a demo to someone > >interested in using perf ;-\ > > > >So for now I'm not applying that one. > > right, so you want one with < 0 check or wait for something else? I > was not expecting to find it in your perf/core branch, yet there it > is. I'll remove it from there, but try it, IIRC there will be some other problem :-\ I'd have to reread the messages I sent, but from what I recall the return from perf_evlist__start_workload() will _always_ be valid, i.e. what you're testing there is just if the parent wrote a byte to a pipe to signal the waiting child to call exec, and that _will_ work, the exec()? perhaps not, you'd have to setup the signal error reporting mechanism, etc. Perhaps this should be somehow done by perf_evlist__start_workload, so that what it reports is the result of the exec in the child, and not merely if it managed to tell it to try to exec... - Arnaldo > > > >Ah, at this point elves are everywhere, dammit! ;-) > > An elf put it there? Right, dwarves may be involved, didn't had the time to figure that out... > David