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=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 025BCC433FE for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 17:03:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C390723B02 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 17:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730625AbgLHRDf (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:03:35 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:45796 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730612AbgLHRDe (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:03:34 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0B8H2bDj018837; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:02:50 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : subject : to : cc : references : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=DRRHGhI+esERVSQ1XUhnZZCx90myVMtMfQXs2YGWjyo=; b=rD7l4H1tGHGFIVfY61bIC5evjkMhkyDcfrTI4PclRN9qOymYMe6KayyCeRbO9Bmdt4mM hq2g5xcKTsvAmz6O6p1vrh401JgF1iVpWact3oejffgXSDN2fFmV4dZg7HGjkSBQUcgD zB0NXGwEWtcdyDKQNLj1dSmMyS+3sgL+tVH1Pj+BCjK87/unxZUb2a+mKGhb80r3T20/ CXQsMi+ySrKhCzyu0xfjmpRY91q7lYyCzSFjdllb1zpPJRw6CBC/Vzv+1UohqA5bg5R4 cun3Q8UYcQmQqekc/o2lbF4j72n2kDRXiHJKLPBBsmrEaRySA0HNft8/USGJXkHJ9Dky Qg== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35a6277971-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 08 Dec 2020 12:02:50 -0500 Received: from m0098399.ppops.net (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 0B8H2niQ020044; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 12:02:49 -0500 Received: from ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (6b.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.107]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35a627795y-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 08 Dec 2020 12:02:49 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0B8GvZtu030336; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 17:02:46 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.196]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3581u8nj7n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 08 Dec 2020 17:02:46 +0000 Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.61]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 0B8H2hMp47317482 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 8 Dec 2020 17:02:43 GMT Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9364F11C069; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 17:02:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDE3411C04C; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 17:02:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.199.44.35] (unknown [9.199.44.35]) by d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 17:02:39 +0000 (GMT) From: Ravi Bangoria Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf test: Skip test 68 for Powerpc To: Thomas Richter , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Kajol Jain , jolsa@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, irogers@google.com, rbernon@codeweavers.com, maddy@linux.ibm.com, atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Ravi Bangoria References: <20201104082954.57338-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com> <20201119135022.36340-1-kjain@linux.ibm.com> <4a2908ca-6b75-c688-ec3b-7f37783f08cc@linux.ibm.com> <20201207163524.GF125383@kernel.org> <763d4593-d581-0971-338c-b811925be45b@linux.ibm.com> Message-ID: <29a77348-2ab7-1235-3fcf-c505dab1f1a1@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 22:32:33 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <763d4593-d581-0971-338c-b811925be45b@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.343,18.0.737 definitions=2020-12-08_11:2020-12-08,2020-12-08 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012080101 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/8/20 8:13 PM, Thomas Richter wrote: > On 12/7/20 5:35 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> Em Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 03:04:53PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: >>> >>> >>> On 11/19/20 7:20 PM, Kajol Jain wrote: >>>> Commit ed21d6d7c48e6e ("perf tests: Add test for PE binary format support") >>>> adds a WINDOWS EXE file named tests/pe-file.exe, which is >>>> examined by the test case 'PE file support'. As powerpc doesn't support >>>> it, we are skipping this test. >>>> >>>> Result in power9 platform before this patach: >>>> [command]# ./perf test -F 68 >>>> 68: PE file support : Failed! >>>> >>>> Result in power9 platform after this patch: >>>> [command]# ./perf test -F 68 >>>> 68: PE file support : Skip >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kajol Jain >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Ravi Bangoria >> >> But why is it failing? I.e. what is that >> >> perf test -v -F 68 >> >> outputs? >> >> Using 'perf report' on a perf.data file containing samples in such >> binaries, collected on x86 should work on whatever workstation a >> developer uses. >> >> Say, on a MacBook aarch64 one can look at a perf.data file collected on >> a x86_64 system where Wine running a PE binary was present. >> >> - Arnaldo >> > > Hi > > What is the distro you are using? > I observed the same issue on s390 but this was fixed for fedora33 somehow. > The error just went away after a dnf update.... > > [root@m35lp76 perf]# cat /etc/fedora-release > Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) > [root@m35lp76 perf]# ./perf test -F 68 > 68: PE file support : Ok > [root@m35lp76 perf]# > > > However on my fedora32 machine it still fails: > [root@t35lp46 perf]# cat /etc/fedora-release > Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two) > [root@t35lp46 perf]# ./perf test -F 68 > 68: PE file support : FAILED! > [root@t35lp46 perf]# > > Note that I am running the same kernel on both machines: linux 5.10.0rc7 downloaded > this morning. > Ok that's interesting. I don't see that on powerpc. Fedora 32 with 5.10.0-rc2+ kernel: $ ./perf test -vv -F 68 68: PE file support : --- start --- filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:40 Failed to read build_id ---- end ---- PE file support: FAILED! Fedora 33 with 5.10.0-rc3 kernel: $ ./perf test -vv -F 68 68: PE file support : --- start --- filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:40 Failed to read build_id ---- end ---- PE file support: FAILED! Ubuntu 18.04.5 with 4.15.0-126-generic kernel: $ ./perf test -vv -F 68 68: PE file support : --- start --- filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:41 Failed to read build_id ---- end ---- PE file support: FAILED! I assumed bfd is not capable to parse PE files on powerpc. Though, I didn't check it in more detail. I'll look into it tomorrow. Ravi