[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150114115749.GB6369@krava.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 12:57:49 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>
Cc: jolsa@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lizefan@...wei.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, paulus@...ba.org,
mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf: fix dwarf unwind using libunwind.
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:36:47AM +0800, Wang Nan wrote:
> Perf tool fails to unwind user stack if the event raises in a shared
SNIP
> +
> __attribute__ ((noinline))
> static int krava_3(struct thread *thread)
> {
> - return unwind_thread(thread);
> + struct thread *array[2] = {thread, thread};
> + void *fp = &bsearch;
> + /*
> + * make _bsearch a volatile function pointer to
> + * prevent potential optimization, which may expand
> + * bsearch and call compare directly from this function,
> + * instead of libc shared object.
> + */
> + void *(*volatile _bsearch)(void *, void *, size_t,
> + size_t, int (*)(void *, void *));
> +
> + _bsearch = fp;
> + _bsearch(array, &thread, 2, sizeof(struct thread **), compare);
> + return global_unwind_retval;
> }
ah, I've got confused with the NO_LIBUNWIND_DEBUG_FRAME name
and got the impression that we could use it in the tests/make
as another compile option test..
but your change is even better ;-) thanks for updating this test
Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
thanks,
jirka
--
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