Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

2017-03-06 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 13:23:30 +0530 Ravi Bangoria wrote: > > > On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530 > > Ravi Bangoria wrote: > > > >> The v5 patchset for sdt

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

2017-03-06 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 13:23:30 +0530 Ravi Bangoria wrote: > > > On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530 > > Ravi Bangoria wrote: > > > >> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has > >> couple of issues. For

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

2017-03-06 Thread Ravi Bangoria
On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530 > Ravi Bangoria wrote: > >> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has >> couple of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code >>

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

2017-03-06 Thread Ravi Bangoria
On Tuesday 07 February 2017 08:25 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530 > Ravi Bangoria wrote: > >> The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has >> couple of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code >> in general code. It lacks support

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

2017-02-06 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530 Ravi Bangoria wrote: > The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has > couple of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code > in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix > b/w/d),

Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

2017-02-06 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 16:41:38 +0530 Ravi Bangoria wrote: > The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has > couple of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code > in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix > b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and

[PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

2017-02-02 Thread Ravi Bangoria
The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has couple of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to

[PATCH 0/5] perf/sdt: Argument support for x86 and powepc

2017-02-02 Thread Ravi Bangoria
The v5 patchset for sdt marker argument support for x86 [1] has couple of issues. For example, it still has x86 specific code in general code. It lacks support for rNN (with size postfix b/w/d), %rsp, %esp, %sil etc. registers and such sdt markers are failing at 'perf probe'. It also fails to