On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 11:43 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 02:33:43PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> Looking at it, but how do you envision the workflow when/if this is
> merged into the kernel?
>
> Nowadays, I have to do:
>
> make -C tools/perf build-test
>
>
From: Michael Petlan [mailto:mpet...@redhat.com]
>
>On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 16:16 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>>
>> > I have met this when writing new tests for perf-probe into the testsuite
>> > I had been speaking about some time ago [1]. But if needed, I may add it
>> > as a perf-test
On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 16:16 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>
> > I have met this when writing new tests for perf-probe into the testsuite
> > I had been speaking about some time ago [1]. But if needed, I may add it
> > as a perf-test entry as you wish.
>
> Please :-)
>
Hi,
after a
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 02:25:43PM +0100, Michael Petlan wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 16:16 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >
> > > I have met this when writing new tests for perf-probe into the testsuite
> > > I had been speaking about some time ago [1]. But if needed, I may add it
>
Em Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 02:33:43PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 02:25:43PM +0100, Michael Petlan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 16:16 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have met this when writing new tests for perf-probe into the testsuite
> > > > I
From: Michael Petlan [mailto:mpet...@redhat.com]
>
>On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 12:08 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:18:22PM +0100, Michael Petlan escreveu:
>> > I have been playing with perf-probe tool and I found out that some bogus
>> > values of a function
Em Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 01:03:47AM +, 平松雅巳 / HIRAMATU，MASAMI escreveu:
> From: Michael Petlan [mailto:mpet...@redhat.com]
> >On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 12:08 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >> Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:18:22PM +0100, Michael Petlan escreveu:
> >> > I have been playing
>From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [mailto:a...@kernel.org]
>Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:54:24AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
>> Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:18:22PM +0100, Michael Petlan escreveu:
>> > I have been playing with perf-probe tool and I found out that some bogus
>> > values of
On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 12:08 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:18:22PM +0100, Michael Petlan escreveu:
> > I have been playing with perf-probe tool and I found out that some bogus
> > values of a function argument are obtained by perf-record.
> >
> > How to
Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 07:30:39PM +0100, Michael Petlan escreveu:
> On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 12:08 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:18:22PM +0100, Michael Petlan escreveu:
> > > I have been playing with perf-probe tool and I found out that some bogus
> > > values
Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:18:22PM +0100, Michael Petlan escreveu:
> Hi *,
>
> I have been playing with perf-probe tool and I found out that some bogus
> values of a function argument are obtained by perf-record.
>
> How to reproduce:
>
> gcc -O0 -g -o dummy dummy.c
> perf probe -x ./dummy
Em Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:18:22PM +0100, Michael Petlan escreveu:
> I have been playing with perf-probe tool and I found out that some bogus
> values of a function argument are obtained by perf-record.
>
> How to reproduce:
>
> gcc -O0 -g -o dummy dummy.c
> perf probe -x ./dummy --add 'isprime
12 matches
Mail list logo
