[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201207163524.GF125383@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 13:35:24 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>, jolsa@...hat.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, irogers@...gle.com,
tmricht@...ux.ibm.com, rbernon@...eweavers.com,
maddy@...ux.ibm.com, atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf test: Skip test 68 for Powerpc
Em Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 03:04:53PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
>
>
> On 11/19/20 7:20 PM, Kajol Jain wrote:
> > Commit ed21d6d7c48e6e ("perf tests: Add test for PE binary format support")
> > adds a WINDOWS EXE file named tests/pe-file.exe, which is
> > examined by the test case 'PE file support'. As powerpc doesn't support
> > it, we are skipping this test.
> >
> > Result in power9 platform before this patach:
> > [command]# ./perf test -F 68
> > 68: PE file support : Failed!
> >
> > Result in power9 platform after this patch:
> > [command]# ./perf test -F 68
> > 68: PE file support : Skip
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
But why is it failing? I.e. what is that
perf test -v -F 68
outputs?
Using 'perf report' on a perf.data file containing samples in such
binaries, collected on x86 should work on whatever workstation a
developer uses.
Say, on a MacBook aarch64 one can look at a perf.data file collected on
a x86_64 system where Wine running a PE binary was present.
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists