From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751555AbaK0OJ5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2014 09:09:57 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:54318 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751019AbaK0OJz convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2014 09:09:55 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,469,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="644552635" From: "Liang, Kan" To: Namhyung Kim CC: "acme@kernel.org" , "jolsa@redhat.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "ak@linux.intel.com" Subject: RE: [PATCH V5 3/3] perf tool: check buildid for symoff Thread-Topic: [PATCH V5 3/3] perf tool: check buildid for symoff Thread-Index: AQHQCeaf8ZnshsuiH02FNfwCATHuw5x0gVew Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 14:09:51 +0000 Message-ID: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F07701676CB2@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1416844829-26945-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com> <1416844829-26945-3-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com> <87d289o0sz.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> In-Reply-To: <87d289o0sz.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Hi Kan, > > On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 11:00:29 -0500, Kan Liang wrote: > > From: Kan Liang > > > > symoff can support both same binaries and different binaries. However, > > the offset may be changed for different binaries. This patch checks > > the buildid of perf.data. If they are from different binaries, print a > > warning to notify the user. > > Hmm.. I think that perf diff is supposed to compare performance between > different (i.e. modified) binaries. So there's a little point to print the > warning IMHO - but I'm not insist it strongly.. > > Anyway, I think what we really need for the warning is different version of > same binary. For example, if data file 1 has DSO A and B, and data file 2 has > DSO B and C, we should not consider they're different (unless build-ids of B > in data file 1 and 2 are different) since A and C won't affect symoff > comparision. > It looks good. But I still slightly prefer to warn/inform the user if there are any different dsos, not just from common part. But it's not a strong option. I'd like to hear from others. Arnaldo? Jirka? Thanks, Kan > Thanks, > Namhyung