linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf test: Skip test 68 for Powerpc

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: <20201209173743.GB185686@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:37:43 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>,
        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,
        rbernon@...eweavers.com, maddy@...ux.ibm.com,
        atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf test: Skip test 68 for Powerpc

Em Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:43:17PM +0100, Thomas Richter escreveu:
> On 12/7/20 5:35 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > 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
> > 
> 
> Hi 
> 
> What is the distro you are using?
> I observed the same issue on s390 but this was fixed for fedora33 somehow.
> The error just went away after a dnf update....
> 
> [root@...lp76 perf]# cat /etc/fedora-release 
> Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three)
> [root@...lp76 perf]# ./perf test -F 68
> 68: PE file support                                                 : Ok
> [root@...lp76 perf]# 
> 
> 
> However on my fedora32 machine it still fails:
> [root@...lp46 perf]# cat /etc/fedora-release 
> Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two)
> [root@...lp46 perf]# ./perf test -F 68
> 68: PE file support                                                 : FAILED!
> [root@...lp46 perf]# 
> 
> Note that I am running the same kernel on both machines: linux 5.10.0rc7 downloaded
> this morning.

Fedora 33.

What does 'perf test -v -F 68' says?

- Arnaldo