Hi,
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, David Miller wrote:
>
> Please use "perf", it's supported much better on sparc64 than perfmon
> ever was, the tool is in the kernel tree itself, and it is actively
> being developed.
>
As David says, try to use perf. It may not have the events you care abou
When monitoring another process, the kernels up through linux-2.6.34-rc7
have a bug where all of the events except the group leader give a zero
value for the time_running and time_enabled values. This #define allows
us to work around that bug by copying these two values from the group
leader to al
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 17:33 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> While testing 2.6.34-rc7 I ran into the following issue when
>> using BTS sampling on Intel Core. It seems like something
>> is not terminated properly. I am sampling BT
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 17:33 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> While testing 2.6.34-rc7 I ran into the following issue when
> using BTS sampling on Intel Core. It seems like something
> is not terminated properly. I am sampling BTS per-thread
> on a test program, then hit CTRL-C, one second
Hi,
While testing 2.6.34-rc7 I ran into the following issue when
using BTS sampling on Intel Core. It seems like something
is not terminated properly. I am sampling BTS per-thread
on a test program, then hit CTRL-C, one second later my
machine crashes while running bash. Crash dump below:
[ 750.
