From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1644CCCA473 for ; Sun, 3 Jul 2022 16:51:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232684AbiGCQvY (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:51:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40266 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231179AbiGCQvV (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:51:21 -0400 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B01256313; Sun, 3 Jul 2022 09:51:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49EAE5C0080; Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:51:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 03 Jul 2022 12:51:17 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=anarazel.de; h= cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1656867077; x=1656953477; bh=sx2V7qb2mC RCN2UHEL7rClCbV0gR7Cm92ibBUoYCbAQ=; b=FAfwAIBEkeB72tNGFRpBk8RMIq uOiIFtBsP9Eb7mopEpyG5AGahUmTJNfzbLPdec1JBL4FdFWe2chsrwETN4vSU2nr Kp6ECDB/I3MxU1E7VhQQMOQIwbQCTsmV85iCTp5cvl38ziT7yXMxewTbwhxIhGbK ST63j4MvNYb8c+J/WC5SII4i4px++HWTo6DngrJrJqmphZaA4kTRAMUYGRaClKRI /Z33cKXueeyw4K9+8Cp52AuuQ0D4glQcw1HHYRX2G4WJMyEtg6wjqr2dfbbZskWG KMfTKEy4ZJolaAnDO03WPmdOv0nAm/ugUJiS2+apAPGWYBCD8DioqwoSGrPA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1656867077; x=1656953477; bh=sx2V7qb2mCRCN2UHEL7rClCbV0gR 7Cm92ibBUoYCbAQ=; b=WH93qYTh1kemwAtyxLgmRgz7tk1c/u6AUB3WqNKIlvOJ x0U7MGv7ZCgStUyab4qE/4EnPbMC31KfZAD65i4h3bbGStVi5BJQbVHRF5cv7vNL u6mhx3D1RiqLTvnBg50l9+rpJEGMr/m74Ece6lKcD0TpRMjzv3GAa8DRbAeeS1Ug Fb9TdsOiV2yJX6atHVyO8Lo+8x1IcSqtd+vipTQkHwNY2697XEmXz6gVbBhy6dqx r1Vjuvn3qOvASnkTMMD3jf5df3HlTc9XVHoFnqasRmbMK1a5e5uFv47ddUIx51t5 s5pKHwTURbLemE46V50nvxOWjBq6iUCkWrZ859WdHA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrudehjedguddtkecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpeetnhgu rhgvshcuhfhrvghunhguuceorghnughrvghssegrnhgrrhgriigvlhdruggvqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedvffefvefhteevffegieetfefhtddvffejvefhueetgeeludehteev udeitedtudenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpegrnhgurhgvshesrghnrghrrgiivghlrdguvg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: id4a34324:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:51:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 09:51:15 -0700 From: Andres Freund To: Sedat Dilek Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Mark Rutland , alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jolsa@kernel.org, Namhyung Kim , Quentin Monnet , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [perf-tools] Build-error in tools/perf/util/annotate.c with LLVM-14 Message-ID: <20220703165115.gox3hlwwdcnorcul@awork3.anarazel.de> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 2022-07-03 13:54:41 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: > Andres, you have some test-cases how you verified the built perf is OK? I ran an intentionally expensive workload, monitored it with bpftrace, then took a perf profile. Then annotated the bpf "function" and verified it looked the same before / after, using a perf built in a container (and thus compiling). Similar with bpftool, I dumped a jited program with a bpftool built with / without the patches (inside the container using nsenter for the version without the patches, so I could build it, using nsenter -t $pid -m -p) and compared both the json and non-json output before / after. V=4; nsenter -t 847325 -m -p /usr/src/linux/tools/bpf/bpftool/bpftool -j -d prog dump jited id 22 > /tmp/22.jit.json.$V; nsenter -t 847325 -m -p /usr/src/linux/tools/bpf/bpftool/bpftool -d prog dump jited id 22 > /tmp/22.jit.txt.$V and then diffed the results. bpf_jit_disasm was harder, because bpf_jit_enable = 2 is broken currently. So I gathered output in a VM from an older kernel, and used bpf_jit_disasm -f ... before / after the patches. Greetings, Andres Freund