Hi Arnaldo,
Thanks for the review. Please find my comments below.
On Thursday 28 April 2016 03:17 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 06:02:21PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
Hi Arnaldo,
I've worked on your patch. I'm sending this patch(diff) to check if this
is the
Hi Arnaldo,
Thanks for the review. Please find my comments below.
On Thursday 28 April 2016 03:17 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 06:02:21PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
Hi Arnaldo,
I've worked on your patch. I'm sending this patch(diff) to check if this
is the
Em Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 06:02:21PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> Hi Arnaldo,
>
> I've worked on your patch. I'm sending this patch(diff) to check if this
> is the same idea you want to progress with. I cleanup your patch,
> removed arch specific compile time directives and changed code to
>
Em Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 06:02:21PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> Hi Arnaldo,
>
> I've worked on your patch. I'm sending this patch(diff) to check if this
> is the same idea you want to progress with. I cleanup your patch,
> removed arch specific compile time directives and changed code to
>
Hi Arnaldo,
I've worked on your patch. I'm sending this patch(diff) to check if this
is the same idea you want to progress with. I cleanup your patch,
removed arch specific compile time directives and changed code to
enable cross arch reporting. I tested record on powerpc and report
on x86 and
Hi Arnaldo,
I've worked on your patch. I'm sending this patch(diff) to check if this
is the same idea you want to progress with. I cleanup your patch,
removed arch specific compile time directives and changed code to
enable cross arch reporting. I tested record on powerpc and report
on x86 and
Em Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 04:28:45PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> Thanks Arnaldo for putting the effort.
>
> I've tested this patch on powerpc and it looks fine to me. Please find my
> below comments.
>
> On Friday 25 March 2016 02:45 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016
Em Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 04:28:45PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> Thanks Arnaldo for putting the effort.
>
> I've tested this patch on powerpc and it looks fine to me. Please find my
> below comments.
>
> On Friday 25 March 2016 02:45 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016
Thanks Arnaldo for putting the effort.
I've tested this patch on powerpc and it looks fine to me. Please find
my below comments.
On Friday 25 March 2016 02:45 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:19:21PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
Em Tue, Mar 22,
Thanks Arnaldo for putting the effort.
I've tested this patch on powerpc and it looks fine to me. Please find
my below comments.
On Friday 25 March 2016 02:45 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:19:21PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
Em Tue, Mar 22,
Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:19:21PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 04:12:11PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > Em Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:37:42PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> > > 'perf kvm record' is not available on powerpc because 'perf'
Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:19:21PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 04:12:11PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > Em Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:37:42PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> > > 'perf kvm record' is not available on powerpc because 'perf'
Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 04:12:11PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:37:42PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> > 'perf kvm record' is not available on powerpc because 'perf' relies on
> > the 'cycles' event (a PMU event) to profile the guest. However, for
> >
Em Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 04:12:11PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:37:42PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> > 'perf kvm record' is not available on powerpc because 'perf' relies on
> > the 'cycles' event (a PMU event) to profile the guest. However, for
> >
Em Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:37:42PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> 'perf kvm record' is not available on powerpc because 'perf' relies on
> the 'cycles' event (a PMU event) to profile the guest. However, for
> powerpc, this can't be used from the host because the PMUs are controlled
> by the
Em Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:37:42PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> 'perf kvm record' is not available on powerpc because 'perf' relies on
> the 'cycles' event (a PMU event) to profile the guest. However, for
> powerpc, this can't be used from the host because the PMUs are controlled
> by the
'perf kvm record' is not available on powerpc because 'perf' relies on
the 'cycles' event (a PMU event) to profile the guest. However, for
powerpc, this can't be used from the host because the PMUs are controlled
by the guest rather than the host.
There exists a tracepoint 'kvm_hv:kvm_guest_exit'
'perf kvm record' is not available on powerpc because 'perf' relies on
the 'cycles' event (a PMU event) to profile the guest. However, for
powerpc, this can't be used from the host because the PMUs are controlled
by the guest rather than the host.
There exists a tracepoint 'kvm_hv:kvm_guest_exit'
18 matches
Mail list logo
