On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 at 11:09, Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 10:15:56 -0600 > Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 at 11:46, Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > It yields success for the --per-thread case..: > > > > > > $ sudo taskset -c 0 ./perf record -e cs_etm/@20010000.etf/ --per-thread uname -a > > > Linux juno 4.18.0-rc8-00011-gb82af52c4b35-dirty #147 SMP PREEMPT Thu Aug 9 11:20:37 CDT 2018 aarch64 GNU/Linux > > > [ perf record: Woken up 0 times to write data ] > > > Warning: > > > AUX data lost 1 times out of 2! > > > > > > [ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.067 MB perf.data ] > > > $ > > > > > > ..but not for CPU-wide?: > > > > > > $ sudo taskset -c 0 ./perf record -e cs_etm/@20010000.etf/ uname -a > > > failed to mmap with 12 (Cannot allocate memory) > > > $ sudo taskset -c 0 ./perf record -e cs_etm/@20010000.etf/ -C 0 uname -a > > > failed to mmap with 12 (Cannot allocate memory) > > > $ > > > > This patchset is getting very old and a fair amount of things have > > changed since then. I'm hoping to be coming out with a new one > > shortly. Nonetheless the above is returning an error in CPU-wide > > scenarios while the feature is being implemented. Isn't what you > > requested or have I misunderstood your comment? > > No, sigh, I just automatically assumed the patchset would include > CPU-wide support again. If it were being done that way, we'd all know > that the feature(s) this patchset adds would be doing the right thing > for that purpose, guaranteed. The patchset published on this list never had support for CPU-wide scenarios. This is only a preparatory step, the first one in a few more to come. Sending the whole thing in one go would be way too heavy and is not realistic. > > The other thing that's going on here is that I'm becoming numb to the > loathsome "failed to mmap with 12 (Cannot allocate memory)" being > returned no matter what the error is/was. E.g., an error that would > indicate a sense of non-implementation would be much better > appreciated than presumably what the above is doing, i.e., returning > -ENOMEM. That, backed up with specific details in the form of human > readable text in dmesg would be *most* welcome. As part of the refactoring of the code to support CPU-wide scenarios I intend to emit better diagnostic messages from the driver. Modifying rb_alloc_aux() to propagate the error message generated by the architecture specific PMUs doesn't look hard either and I _may_ get to it as part of this work. Mathieu > > Thanks, > > Kim
