From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "W. Michael Petullo" Subject: Re: About the oprofile tools and related profiling tools Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 11:21:05 -0500 Message-ID: <20110531162104.GA5666@imp.local> References: <20110531143542.GK14641@dumpdata.com> <20110531160256.GB31659@dumpdata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110531160256.GB31659@dumpdata.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: George Dunlap , "dunlapg@gmail.com" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "Lv, Hui" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >> Thanks Konrad and George! >> >> I have tried Mike Petullo's patched pvops domain0 and xenoprofile on it can work. >> >> But I did not get the right sample results of HVM guest (No samples >> obtained). So I guess, something should be wrong from hypervisor part >> in profiling HVM guest. >> >> So did anyone successfully profile the HVM based guest using this patch? > You might want to email Mike to ask that. I have only used my variation of the 2.6.39 OProfile patch to passively profile a PV kernel. Note that most of the work was done previously; all I did was port it to Linux 2.6.39. I have not tried it on a HVM kernel. My latest 2.6.39 patch is at: http://www.flyn.org/patches/linux-xen-passive-oprofile/linux-2.6.39.rc5.git5-xen-passive-oprofile.patch.gz -- Mike :wq