linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] perf record: missing buildid for callstack modules

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160119152742.GI6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:27:42 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] perf record: missing buildid for callstack modules

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:56:40PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:

> > But but ... why is #2 a problem with mtime? If we have an out of date record in 
> > the perf.data, then the perf.data is uninteresting in 99% of the usecases! It's 
> > out of date, most likely because the binary the developer is working on got 
> > rebuilt, or the system got upgraded - in both cases the developer does not care 
> > about the old records anymore...
> 
> We have 'perf diff' command which compares old and new performance
> results of a same program.  People can use it to see how much improved
> in the new version than the baseline.  In this case, the old binary
> should be found from the old perf.data.

Just means they'll have to use perf-archive or whatnot before that
works. Making the regular perf-record dead slow just so that a few more
complex workloads work doesn't make sense.