From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753615Ab3JCIgM (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2013 04:36:12 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:48507 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751282Ab3JCIgJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2013 04:36:09 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,1024,1371106800"; d="scan'208";a="387178940" Message-ID: <524D2E06.5020801@intel.com> Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 11:42:46 +0300 From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jiri Olsa CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Ahern , Frederic Weisbecker , Mike Galbraith , Namhyung Kim , Paul Mackerras , Stephane Eranian Subject: Re: [BUG] perf tests: Test converting perf time to TSC References: <20131002132308.GB20396@krava.brq.redhat.com> <524C23D3.6020300@intel.com> <20131003081737.GB993@krava.brq.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20131003081737.GB993@krava.brq.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/10/13 11:17, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:46:59PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 02/10/13 16:23, Jiri Olsa wrote: >>> hi, >>> got a segfault in the tsc test on latest acme's tree. >>> >>> I'm dealing with some other issues right now, so just reporting ;-) >> >> The capability bits have changed positions. You need to have: >> >> commit fa7315871046b9a4c48627905691dbde57e51033 >> Author: Peter Zijlstra >> Date: Thu Sep 19 10:16:42 2013 +0200 >> >> perf: Fix capabilities bitfield compatibility in 'struct >> perf_event_mmap_page' > > ok, I'll try that.. but anyway, the test should > not crash in account of missing kernel change No the ABI is broken in that case - better to crash.