On Friday 13 May 2016 04:34 AM, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>> Ah.. which might be a hint that nobody is actually explicitly testing
>> for this and we might just get away with changing the ABI.
>>
>> Vince, what say you; shall we try and get away with it? ;-
On Thu, 12 May 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Ah.. which might be a hint that nobody is actually explicitly testing
> for this and we might just get away with changing the ABI.
>
> Vince, what say you; shall we try and get away with it? ;-)
It's probably worth trying.
The only other time anyone
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:24:25PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On Thursday 12 May 2016 12:12 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> Tried that and doesn't even compile. Reconfirms what Vince said, ENOTSUPP
> >> is not
> >> > exposed to userspace (being in include/linux and not include/uapi/linux)
> > Dur
On Thursday 12 May 2016 12:12 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> Tried that and doesn't even compile. Reconfirms what Vince said, ENOTSUPP is
>> not
>> > exposed to userspace (being in include/linux and not include/uapi/linux)
> Durr, so what does userspace see?
It sees the "value" of ENOTSUPP, i.e. 52
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:58:43AM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On Thursday 12 May 2016 01:06 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 10:53:43PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> >
> >> > Right thats what I feared. But hold on, I don't think we need to change
> >> > the ABI to
> >> > ach
On Thursday 12 May 2016 01:06 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 10:53:43PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>
>> > Right thats what I feared. But hold on, I don't think we need to change
>> > the ABI to
>> > achieve what we want. Gosh why did I even take that path.
>> >
>> > Currentl
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 10:53:43PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Right thats what I feared. But hold on, I don't think we need to change the
> ABI to
> achieve what we want. Gosh why did I even take that path.
>
> Currently the errno switch case in perf_evsel__open_strerror() in doesn't
> handle
On Mon, 9 May 2016, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On Monday 09 May 2016 07:24 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 May 2016, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> >
> >> This allows userspace to identify this case specifically from the
> >> catch all error msg it prints currently.
> >>
> >> This is an ABI change
> >
>
On Monday 09 May 2016 07:24 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Mon, 9 May 2016, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>
>> This allows userspace to identify this case specifically from the
>> catch all error msg it prints currently.
>>
>> This is an ABI change
>
> An ABI change which will probably break things.
Right
On Mon, 9 May 2016, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> This allows userspace to identify this case specifically from the
> catch all error msg it prints currently.
>
> This is an ABI change
An ABI change which will probably break things.
The original change from ENODEV to ENOTSUPP managed to break things
a
This allows userspace to identify this case specifically from the
catch all error msg it prints currently.
This is an ABI change
Before
---
| # perf record ls
| Error:
| The sys_perf_event_open() syscall returned with 524 (Unknown error 524)
| for event (cycles:ppp).
| /bin/dmesg may provide
11 matches
Mail list logo