linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] tools, perf, script: Add --call-trace and --call-ret-trace

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]

Date:   Tue, 2 Oct 2018 11:24:56 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     leo.yan@...aro.org
Cc:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, jolsa@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] tools, perf, script: Add --call-trace and
 --call-ret-trace

Em Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 03:39:03PM +0800, leo.yan@...aro.org escreveu:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:19:44AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Seems to me, these two features are _NOT_ only benefit for intel_pt,
> > > other hardware tracing (e.g. Arm CoreSight) can enable these features
> > > as well.  This patch is to document only for intel_pt, later if we
> > > enable this feature on Arm platform we need to change the doc;
> > > alternatively we can use more general description for these two options
> > > at the first place.  How about you think for this?
> > 
> > Likely it already works for CoreSight
> 
> I think Kim played with this patch series and he also pointed me for
> this series.
> 
> > I specified intel_pt, because if we just say traces the users won't
> > know what PMU to specify for record. Being too abstract is
> > often not helpful.
> > 
> > If someone successfully tests it on CoreSight they could submit
> > a patch to the documentation to add "or <coresightpmu>" to these
> > two cases. That would make it then clear for those users too.
> 
> Okay, agree.
> 
> Actually I applied your patch series v6 on the perf latest core branch
> and tested on Arm Juno board, I observed there have couple issues, one
> is CoreSight trace data doesn't support timestamp so I need to use
> '-F,-time' to workaround the command failure; another issue is now
> CoreSight is absent to set sample flags so perf fails to resolve
> symbols [1]; these two issues are only related with CoreSight decoder
> and it's no matter with this patch, so I didn't mention in my previous
> replying.

Could I take that as a Tested-by? I.e. you actually applied the patches,
run it and saw that it works as advertised, right?

- Arnaldo
 
> I need a bit more time to work out more formal CoreSight fixing patches
> and will send for reviewing (also will include one patch to clarifying
> Arm Coresight support in doc as suggested).
> 
> Thanks,
> Leo Yan
> 
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/tree/tools/perf/builtin-script.c?h=perf/core#n1128