lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Perf record format portability
    Em Wed, May 16, 2012 at 05:16:55PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
    > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:59:27AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
    > > Adding Jiri and Steven to the CC list.
    > >
    > > Em Wed, May 16, 2012 at 02:50:31PM +0400, Dmitry Antipov escreveu:
    > > > On 05/15/2012 07:51 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
    > > > >Em Tue, May 15, 2012 at 07:27:39PM +0400, Dmitry Antipov escreveu:
    > > > >>are there any thoughts on how much of the perf.data is portable and how much it should be?
    > > > >>I'm interesting in recording scheduler activity on one machine and then replaying on
    > > > >>another. As I can see, replaying x86 perf.data on ARM doesn't work. At least, should it
    > > > >>work with a small subset of recorded events (for example, sched:sched_switch,
    > > > >>sched:sched_process_exit, sched:sched_process_fork, sched:sched_wakeup
    > > > >>and sched:sched_migrate_task) on the same architecture?
    > > > >
    > > > >Endianness issues? ARM EB? There are some patches by Jiri Olsa that may
    > > > >help you if that is the case.
    >
    > latest version sent today, there's description of tests I did:
    > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=133715172512742&w=2
    >
    > Each time I run new sort of test, another endianity issue is hit.
    > so, tracepoints.. I'll check ;)

    The tracepoints part is a different problem, I think, but take a look
    anyway ;-)

    - Arnaldo


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-05-16 18:21    [W:0.025 / U:0.140 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site