[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <53a89f25-d29f-0df4-61c9-77d70a507117@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 19:28:06 +0530
From: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>
Cc: jolsa@...hat.com, kan.liang@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf report: Fix segfault with '-F phys_daddr'
On 11/12/19 4:34 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:19:46AM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
>> If perf.data file is not recorded with mem-info, adding 'phys_daddr'
>> to output field in perf report results in segfault. Fix that.
>>
>> Before:
>> $ ./perf record ls
>> $ ./perf report -F +phys_daddr
>> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
>>
>> After:
>> $ ./perf report -F +phys_daddr
>> Samples: 11 of event 'cycles:u', Event count (approx.): 1485821
>> Overhead Data Physical Address Command Shared Object Symbol
>> 22.57% [.] 0000000000000000 ls libc-2.29.so [.] __strcoll_l
>> 21.87% [.] 0000000000000000 ls ld-2.29.so [.] _dl_relocate_object
>> ...
>
> Shouldn't we instead just bail out and state that this isn't possible
> and leave the user wondering why what was asked isn't presented?
You mean popup with something like "phys_daddr is not available in perf.data"
and also don't show that column in perf report?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists