From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: "Martin Liška" <mliska@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate.
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 11:10:47 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180828141047.GG22309@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <64684c59-492c-3310-a5d2-14b467602acc@suse.cz>
Em Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:06:21AM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu:
> On 08/23/2018 04:12 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Martin Liška escreveu:
> >> The patch changes interpretation of:
> >> callq *0x8(%rbx)
> >>
> >> from:
> >> 0.26 │ → callq *8
> >> to:
> >> 0.26 │ → callq *0x8(%rbx)
> >>
> >> in this can an address is followed by a register, thus
> >> one can't parse only address.
> >
> > Please mention one or two functions where such sequence appears, so that
> > others can reproduce your before/after more quickly,
>
> Sure, there's self-contained example on can compile (-O2) and test.
> It's following call in test function:
>
> test:
> .LFB1:
> .cfi_startproc
> movq %rdi, %rax
> subq $8, %rsp
> .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
> movq %rsi, %rdi
> movq %rdx, %rsi
> call *8(%rax) <---- here
> cmpl $1, %eax
> adcl $-1, %eax
> addq $8, %rsp
> .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
> ret
> .cfi_endproc
Here I'm getting:
Samples: 2K of event 'cycles:uppp', 4000 Hz, Event count (approx.): 1808551484
test /home/acme/c/perf-callq [Percent: local period]
0.17 │ mov %rdx,-0x28(%rbp)
0.58 │ mov -0x18(%rbp),%rax
7.90 │ mov 0x8(%rax),%rax
8.67 │ mov -0x28(%rbp),%rcx
│ mov -0x20(%rbp),%rdx
0.08 │ mov %rcx,%rsi
6.28 │ mov %rdx,%rdi
10.50 │ → callq *%rax
1.67 │ mov %eax,-0x4(%rbp)
11.95 │ cmpl $0x0,-0x4(%rbp)
8.14 │ ↓ je 3d
│ mov -0x4(%rbp),%eax
│ sub $0x1,%eax
│ ↓ jmp 42
│3d: mov $0x0,%eax
7.84 │42: leaveq
│ ← retq
Without the patch, will check if something changes with it.
- Arnaldo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-28 14:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-23 12:29 [PATCH] Properly interpret indirect call in perf annotate Martin Liška
2018-08-23 14:12 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2018-08-27 9:06 ` Martin Liška
2018-08-28 14:10 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
2018-08-28 14:18 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2018-08-28 17:55 ` Martin Liška
2018-08-23 23:00 ` Kim Phillips
2018-08-27 10:37 ` Namhyung Kim
2018-08-27 14:28 ` Martin Liška
2018-08-28 14:10 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180828141047.GG22309@kernel.org \
--to=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mliska@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).