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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=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 B2711C2D0E5 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 18:58:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 871852074D for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 18:58:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Ucb5Lig/" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727508AbgCYS6p (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2020 14:58:45 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-74.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.74]:23518 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-74.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727469AbgCYS6p (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2020 14:58:45 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1585162724; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=pDcT6VSv+IL1mA1lmw4NhWaIKdKw35orV/B/8HEa97g=; b=Ucb5Lig/F65LK+ixoGAi3YNv34rQ83DRpiSXH8s9KWl7bpVPT9WXMbAA2LwmhU/vs3Qlf2 zlOkkUAy5jrjG4+jtP+ObgB6WonFMmw8BuKPy8YHM6Lrrk9Jh436YnFlZMZYf0ya4ERl4D o0XoNRYWLO7yg/ejWb7c3v4RldJnAzI= 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-421-n1qDlKrFNpGzlWyQ0AGB8A-1; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 14:58:38 -0400 X-MC-Unique: n1qDlKrFNpGzlWyQ0AGB8A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 675F3107ACCD; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 18:58:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sandy.ghostprotocols.net (unknown [10.3.128.8]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3EC194B55; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 18:58:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by sandy.ghostprotocols.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8FC1C168; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 15:58:31 -0300 (BRT) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 15:58:31 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Jiri Olsa Cc: ahmadkhorrami , Steven Rostedt , Linux-trace Users , Peter Zijlstra , linux-trace-users-owner@vger.kernel.org, Jin Yao Subject: Re: Wrong Perf Backtraces Message-ID: <20200325185831.GB19495@redhat.com> References: <157597d74ff17f781d9de7e7e3defd13@ut.ac.ir> <20200322203421.715b32d8@oasis.local.home> <21b3df4080709f193d62b159887e2a83@ut.ac.ir> <20200323084942.GA1534489@krava> <8645d3626b4714690925328ab00373d6@ut.ac.ir> <20200325154643.GA1934048@krava> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200325154643.GA1934048@krava> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Sender: linux-trace-users-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-users@vger.kernel.org Em Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 04:46:43PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 07:48:39PM +0430, ahmadkhorrami wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Could you give me some hints about where the actual problem takes place? Is > > the problem with "Perf" or the hardware part (i.e., "Hardware Performance > > Counters")? Can I revise the problem by simply modifying the code? How much > > work is needed? > > heya, > might be some callchain processing bug, but I can't reproduce it on my setup.. > would you have/make some simple example that would reproduce the issue? > > Another option is that you'd send perf.data together with 'perf archive' data. > > Also.. we support 2 dwarf unwinders (libunwind/libdw).. not sure which one you > have compiled in, but would be helpful to see if the other shows the same. perf -vv + ldd `which perf` Output will help us find out which unwinder is being used, as well as the version of perf being used. - Arnaldo