Messages in this thread | | | From | Ravi Bangoria <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf test: Skip test 68 for Powerpc | Date | Tue, 8 Dec 2020 22:32:33 +0530 |
| |
On 12/8/20 8:13 PM, Thomas Richter wrote: > 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@linux.ibm.com> >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.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@m35lp76 perf]# cat /etc/fedora-release > Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) > [root@m35lp76 perf]# ./perf test -F 68 > 68: PE file support : Ok > [root@m35lp76 perf]# > > > However on my fedora32 machine it still fails: > [root@t35lp46 perf]# cat /etc/fedora-release > Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two) > [root@t35lp46 perf]# ./perf test -F 68 > 68: PE file support : FAILED! > [root@t35lp46 perf]# > > Note that I am running the same kernel on both machines: linux 5.10.0rc7 downloaded > this morning. >
Ok that's interesting. I don't see that on powerpc.
Fedora 32 with 5.10.0-rc2+ kernel:
$ ./perf test -vv -F 68 68: PE file support : --- start --- filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:40 Failed to read build_id ---- end ---- PE file support: FAILED!
Fedora 33 with 5.10.0-rc3 kernel:
$ ./perf test -vv -F 68 68: PE file support : --- start --- filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:40 Failed to read build_id ---- end ---- PE file support: FAILED!
Ubuntu 18.04.5 with 4.15.0-126-generic kernel:
$ ./perf test -vv -F 68 68: PE file support : --- start --- filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:41 Failed to read build_id ---- end ---- PE file support: FAILED!
I assumed bfd is not capable to parse PE files on powerpc. Though, I didn't check it in more detail. I'll look into it tomorrow.
Ravi
| |