[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170321141049.GC2531@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:10:49 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
To: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, alexis.berlemont@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
mpe@...erman.id.au, naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
maddy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] perf/sdt/x86: Move OP parser to tools/perf/arch/x86/
Em Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 10:52:17AM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> Thanks Masami for the review.
>
> On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:41 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:41 +0530
> > Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> SDT marker argument is in N@OP format. N is the size of argument and
> >> OP is the actual assembly operand. OP is arch dependent component and
> >> hence it's parsing logic also should be placed under tools/perf/arch/.
> >>
> > Ok, I have one question. Is there any possibility that N is different
> > size of OP? e.g. 8@dil, in this case we will record whole rdi.
> > is that OK?
>
> By looking at list of markers on my x86 Fedora25 box, yes, it's possible
> for case when register size used in OP is more than size specified by N.
> For example, -4@68(%rbx). But I don't see any argument which specifies
> higher size in N compared to size of register in OP, like you mentioned
> in your example.
Masami, can I have your Acked-by for 3-5/5 in this series?
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists