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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:32:16 +0900
From:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, riel@...hat.com,
	mgorman@...e.de, oleg@...hat.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	minchan@...nel.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, dave@...olabs.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/6] Another go at speculative page faults

Hi Peter,

On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 15:14:40 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 09:54:23AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> 
>> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>> > Its what I thought initially, I tried doing perf record with and
>> > without, but then I ran into perf diff not quite working for me and I've
>> > yet to find time to kick that thing into shape.
>> 
>> Might be the 'perf diff' regression fixed by this:
>> 
>>   9ab1f50876db perf diff: Add missing hists__init() call at tool start
>> 
>> I just pushed it out into tip:master.
>
> I was on tip/master, so unlikely to be that as I was likely already
> having it.
>
> perf-report was affected too, for some reason my CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=y
> vmlinux wasn't showing symbols (and I double checked that KASLR crap was
> disabled, so that wasn't confusing stuff either).
>
> When I forced perf-report to use kallsyms it works, however perf-diff
> doesn't have that option.
>
> So there's two issues there, 1) perf-report failing to generate useful
> output and 2) per-diff lacking options to force it to behave.

Did the perf-report fail to show any (kernel) symbols or are they wrong
symbols?  Maybe it's related to this:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/22/78

Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ