[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160919154413.GA14725@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 12:44:13 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, treeze.taeung@...il.com,
naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, markus@...ppelsdorf.de,
chris.ryder@....com, pawel.moll@....com, mhiramat@...nel.org,
rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk, jolsa@...nel.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
hemant@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, namhyung@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/7] perf annotate: Do not ignore call instruction
with indirect target
Em Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 06:29:35PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> Do not ignore call instruction with indirect target when its already
> identified as a call. This is an extension of commit e8ea1561952b
> ("perf annotate: Use raw form for register indirect call instructions")
> to generalize annotation for all instructions with indirect calls.
>
> This is needed for certain powerpc call instructions that use address
> in a register (such as bctrl, btarl, ...).
>
> Apart from that, when kcore is used to disassemble function, all call
> instructions were ignored. This patch will fix it as a side effect by
> not ignoring them. For example,
>
> Before (with kcore):
> mov %r13,%rdi
> callq 0xffffffff811a7e70
> ^ jmpq 64
> mov %gs:0x7ef41a6e(%rip),%al
>
> After (with kcore):
> mov %r13,%rdi
> > callq 0xffffffff811a7e70
> ^ jmpq 64
> mov %gs:0x7ef41a6e(%rip),%al
Ok, makes sense, but then now I have the -> and can't press enter to go
to that function, in fact for the case I'm using as a test, the
vsnprintf kernel function, I get:
│ 56: test %al,%al ▒
│ ↓ je 81 ▒
│ lea -0x38(%rbp),%rsi ▒
│ mov %r15,%rdi ▒
│ → callq 0xffffffff993e3230
That 0xffffffff993e3230 should've been resolved to:
[root@...et ~]# grep ffffffff993e3230 /proc/kallsyms
ffffffff993e3230 t format_decode
Trying to investigate why it doesn't...
- Arnaldo
> Suggested-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
> [Suggested about 'bctrl' instruction]
> Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> Changes in v6:
> - No change
>
> tools/perf/util/annotate.c | 8 ++------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> index ea07588..a05423b 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> @@ -81,16 +81,12 @@ static int call__parse(struct ins_operands *ops, const char *norm_arch)
> return ops->target.name == NULL ? -1 : 0;
>
> indirect_call:
> - tok = strchr(endptr, '(');
> - if (tok != NULL) {
> + tok = strchr(endptr, '*');
> + if (tok == NULL) {
> ops->target.addr = 0;
> return 0;
> }
>
> - tok = strchr(endptr, '*');
> - if (tok == NULL)
> - return -1;
> -
> ops->target.addr = strtoull(tok + 1, NULL, 16);
> return 0;
> }
> --
> 2.5.5
Powered by blists - more mailing lists