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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60450C4361B for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 13:09:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 226C92246B for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 13:09:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728632AbgLONGq (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2020 08:06:46 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:34187 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729202AbgLONGl (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2020 08:06:41 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1608037514; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=K6i1R/Jux6rGJveB2XImrKP/x2SEO2B2XneZ8p4LAjo=; b=OC9bNfmv+mFqgDBIzA5NcqXApCTKJ6uw7CoHkrsDwa7KxXLz55dYZ0BBGjTVwhvtsubsxE OSPZdq5Gfdd2NrD6rUuo+7vK/WW1Y8ITjaniG73KpyrcrOXwOHKjGu+xKBNxuo1TGE07h1 w0xaabTOQe4Xr9/T7BRlDab24FWNiTU= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-363-MWPDB960PNKA957o_gb9yg-1; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 08:05:10 -0500 X-MC-Unique: MWPDB960PNKA957o_gb9yg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A81ED80875; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 13:03:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sandy.ghostprotocols.net (unknown [10.3.128.8]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10EB560C0F; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 13:03:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by sandy.ghostprotocols.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0E0D3243; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:03:40 -0300 (BRT) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:03:39 -0300 From: Arnaldo de Melo To: Thomas Richter Cc: "linux-perf-use." , Heiko Carstens , Sumanth Korikkar Subject: Re: perf test 42 failure on x86 Message-ID: <20201215130339.GA11613@redhat.com> References: <18a7ad32-1da7-f744-411d-d08ff4dfa91a@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <18a7ad32-1da7-f744-411d-d08ff4dfa91a@linux.ibm.com> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Em Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 05:30:46PM +0100, Thomas Richter escreveu: > Hi, > > I just installed Fedora 33 and its latest kernel on my x86_64 virtual machine and > ran into a perf test issue: > > [root@f33 ~]# uname -a > Linux f33 5.9.13-200.fc33.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Dec 8 15:42:52 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > [root@f33 ~]#[root@f33 ~]# perf test -F 42 > 42: BPF filter : > 42.1: Basic BPF filtering : Ok > 42.2: BPF pinning : Ok > 42.3: BPF prologue generation : Ok > 42.4: BPF relocation checker : FAILED! > [root@f33 ~]# > > The last test fails due to unexpected success: > [root@f33 ~]# perf test -v -F 42 > 42: BPF filter : > 42.1: Basic BPF filtering : > --- start --- > .... > libbpf: skip section(9) .eh_frame > libbpf: section(10) .rel.eh_frame, size 16, link 12, flags 0, type=9 > libbpf: skip relo .rel.eh_frame(10) for section(9) > libbpf: section(11) .llvm_addrsig, size 5, link 12, flags 80000000, type=1879002115 > libbpf: skip section(11) .llvm_addrsig > libbpf: section(12) .symtab, size 192, link 1, flags 0, type=2 > libbpf: looking for externs among 8 symbols... > libbpf: collected 0 externs total > libbpf: maps in [bpf_relocation_test]: 1 maps in 16 bytes > libbpf: map 'my_table' (legacy): at sec_idx 5, offset 0. > libbpf: map 6 is "my_table" > libbpf: map '_bpf_rel.bss' (global data): at sec_idx 6, offset 0, flags 400. > libbpf: map 1 is "_bpf_rel.bss" > libbpf: collecting relocating info for: 'func=sys_write' > libbpf: relo for shdr 6, symb 7, value 0, type 1, bind 1, name 26 ('this_is_a_global_val'), insn 7 > libbpf: found data map 1 (_bpf_rel.bss, sec 6, off 0) for insn 7 > Success unexpectedly: libbpf error when dealing with relocation > ---- end ---- > BPF filter subtest 4: FAILED! > [root@f33 ~]# > > There is success when failure is expected. Has anybody already started to look into this? I saw this but didn't manage to start working on it, if you could try to investigate this, that would be fantastic. Thanks, - Arnaldo > > Thomas Richter, Dept 3252, IBM s390 Linux Development, Boeblingen, Germany > -- > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Gregor Pillen > Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294