Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-28 Thread Martin Liška
On 08/28/2018 04:18 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Em Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:10:47AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: Em Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:06:21AM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-28 Thread Martin Liška
On 08/28/2018 04:18 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Em Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:10:47AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: Em Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:06:21AM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:10:47AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > Em Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:06:21AM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > > On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > > >> The patch

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:10:47AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > Em Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:06:21AM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > > On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > > >> The patch

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > The patch changes interpretation of: > callq *0x8(%rbx) > > from: > 0.26 │ → callq *8 > to: > 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) > > in this can an address is followed by a register, thus > one can't parse only address. >

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > The patch changes interpretation of: > callq *0x8(%rbx) > > from: > 0.26 │ → callq *8 > to: > 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) > > in this can an address is followed by a register, thus > one can't parse only address. >

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:06:21AM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > >> The patch changes interpretation of: > >> callq *0x8(%rbx) > >> > >> from: > >> 0.26 │ → callq

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:06:21AM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > >> The patch changes interpretation of: > >> callq *0x8(%rbx) > >> > >> from: > >> 0.26 │ → callq

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-27 Thread Martin Liška
On 08/27/2018 12:37 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: >> The patch changes interpretation of: >> callq *0x8(%rbx) >> >> from: >> 0.26 │ → callq *8 >> to: >> 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) >> >> in this can an address is

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-27 Thread Martin Liška
On 08/27/2018 12:37 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: >> The patch changes interpretation of: >> callq *0x8(%rbx) >> >> from: >> 0.26 │ → callq *8 >> to: >> 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) >> >> in this can an address is

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-27 Thread Namhyung Kim
Hello, On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: > The patch changes interpretation of: > callq *0x8(%rbx) > > from: > 0.26 │ → callq *8 > to: > 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) > > in this can an address is followed by a register, thus > one can't parse only

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-27 Thread Namhyung Kim
Hello, On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: > The patch changes interpretation of: > callq *0x8(%rbx) > > from: > 0.26 │ → callq *8 > to: > 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) > > in this can an address is followed by a register, thus > one can't parse only

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-27 Thread Martin Liška
On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: >> The patch changes interpretation of: >> callq *0x8(%rbx) >> >> from: >> 0.26 │ → callq *8 >> to: >> 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) >> >> in this can an address is

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-27 Thread Martin Liška
On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: >> The patch changes interpretation of: >> callq *0x8(%rbx) >> >> from: >> 0.26 │ → callq *8 >> to: >> 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) >> >> in this can an address is

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-23 Thread Kim Phillips
On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:29:34 +0200 Martin Liška wrote: > The patch changes interpretation of: > callq *0x8(%rbx) > > from: > 0.26 │ → callq *8 > to: > 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) > > in this can an address is followed by a register, thus > one can't parse only address. > >

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-23 Thread Kim Phillips
On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:29:34 +0200 Martin Liška wrote: > The patch changes interpretation of: > callq *0x8(%rbx) > > from: > 0.26 │ → callq *8 > to: > 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) > > in this can an address is followed by a register, thus > one can't parse only address. > >

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-23 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > The patch changes interpretation of: > callq *0x8(%rbx) > > from: > 0.26 │ → callq *8 > to: > 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) > > in this can an address is followed by a register, thus > one can't parse only address.

Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.

2018-08-23 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu: > The patch changes interpretation of: > callq *0x8(%rbx) > > from: > 0.26 │ → callq *8 > to: > 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx) > > in this can an address is followed by a register, thus > one can't parse only address.