[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F50D784.7020101@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 07:21:56 -0700
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, paulus@...ba.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...hat.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] perf tools: Allow multiple threads or processes
in record, stat, top
On 3/2/12 3:56 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> I have a bigger NUMA testbox where perf sampling (perf top, perf
> record, etc.) stopped working (perf stat is fine), and I've
> bisected it back to the above commit.
>
> b52956c961be3a04182ae7b776623531601e0fb7 is the first bad commit
>
> Checking out eca1c3e3f937 works fine, b52956c961b is broken,
> repeatedly - so the bisection is reliable.
>
> One symptom is no sampling records in the perf.data:
>
> phoenix:~> perf record -a sleep 1
> [ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> [ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.023 MB perf.data (~988 samples) ]
> phoenix:~> perf report --stdio
> Warning:
> The perf.data file has no samples!
> # ========
> # captured on: Fri Mar 2 12:01:41 2012
> # hostname : phoenix
> # os release : 3.3.0-rc5+
> # perf version : 3.3.rc5.1698.g68a63a.dirty
> # arch : x86_64
> # nrcpus online : 16
> # nrcpus avail : 16
> # cpudesc : Quad-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 8356
> # cpuid : AuthenticAMD,16,2,3
> # total memory : 33012240 kB
> # cmdline : /home/mingo/bin/perf record -a sleep 1
> # event : name = cycles, type = 0, config = 0x0, config1 = 0x0, config2 = 0x0, excl_usr = 0, excl_k
> # HEADER_CPU_TOPOLOGY info available, use -I to display
> # HEADER_NUMA_TOPOLOGY info available, use -I to display
> # ========
> phoenix:~> perf --version
> perf version 3.3.rc5.1698.g68a63a.dirty
> phoenix:~>
>
> The later fixes to b52956c9, such as:
>
> 6b1bee9035d4: perf tools: fix broken perf record -a mode
>
> did not fix this system - it's still broken as of today's -tip.
>
> Another system running the same kernel does not exhibit this
> problem, so it's somehow specific to this system.
>
> I have not looked deep into this, let me know if you need more
> data.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
Ok. I have a similar Intel based box - 2 socket, E5540 with 24G; this is
the box I typically use for testing. I'll take a look at this later
today and see what I can find.
David
--
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