linux-kernel - Re: Does perf-annotate work correctly?

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: <20171016093439.GA10280@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Oct 2017 17:34:40 +0800
From:   "Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@...el.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     "Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@...el.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        jolsa@...nel.org
Subject: Re: Does perf-annotate work correctly?

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28:53AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 06:15:00PM +0800, Du, Changbin wrote:
> > Hi Jiri,
> > Sorry, missed you (but get_maintainer.pl doesn't list you). Here is ealier email.
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/12/158
> > 
> > Do you think if this is a real issue?
> 
> SNIP
> 
> > >   0.02 │      test   %esi,%esi                                                                   ▒
> > >        │    ↓ js     25                                                                          ▒
> > >  99.98 │    ← retq                                                                               ▒
> > >        │25:   push   %rbp                                                                        ▒
> > >        │      mov    $0x440a,%ecx                                                                ▒
> > >        │      mov    $0x440c,%edx                                                                ▒
> > >        │    vmx_complete_interrupts():                                                           ◆
> > >        │                    break;                                                               ▒
> > >        │            }                                                                            ▒
> > >        │    }                                                                                    ▒
> > >        │                                                                                         ▒
> > >        │    static void vmx_complete_interrupts(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)                            ▒
> > >        │    {                                                                                    ▒
> > >        │      mov    %rsp,%rbp                                                                   ▒
> > >        │    → callq  __vmx_complete_interrupts.part.64                                           ▒
> > >        │            __vmx_complete_interrupts(&vmx->vcpu, vmx->idt_vectoring_info,               ▒
> > >        │      pop    %rbp                                                                        ▒
> > >        │    ← retq                                                                               ▒
> 
> hi,
> there's 'o' key to togle the instruction address or you
> can use the perf annotate --stdio to get it.. should be
> easier to tell if that's the same instruction
>

Thanks for replying. I know the reason now, the instructions are shown in pc
address order, and some C statments are split into chunks. It gives me a
illusion. Thanks.

> jirka
> 

-- 
Thanks,
Changbin Du

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)