lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 02:11:03 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> To: Arun Sharma <asharma@...com> Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Using a new perf tool against an older kernel On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:39:54PM -0700, Arun Sharma wrote: > On 6/23/11 7:22 AM, David Ahern wrote: > > >I have not seen issues like this using newer perf userspace against > >older kernels. For example, my laptop was running Fedora 14 (2.6.35) and > >now Fedora 15 (2.6.38.8) and I typically use latest perf builds (e.g., > >testing patches). > > I narrowed it down to PERF_SAMPLE_RAW: > > perf record -ag -- sleep 1 > > is fine, but: > > perf record -agR -- sleep 1 > > fails for me most of the time. The reason I needed to use the -R in > the first place is that "perf script" fails on older kernels with: > > Samples do not contain timestamps. > > With the newer perf, I don't get errors, but the timestamp field is > invalid. So I need to use the -R flag to get valid timestamps + > stacktraces out of "perf script". I'm confused, you first said it happens with new tools on older kernel. Can you tell us which combination of kernel/user raises the error? and which error. Thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists