On Tue, 2013-10-15 at 14:53 -0500, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-10-15 at 14:44 -0400, Martin Hicks wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt > > <b...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2013-10-15 at 09:59 -0400, Martin Hicks wrote: > > >> I've tracked the start of the strange instruction pointers in 'perf > > >> report' to a commit by Anton: > > >> > > >> commit 75382aa72f06823db7312ad069c3bae2eb3f8548 > > >> Author: Anton Blanchard <an...@samba.org> > > >> Date: Tue Jun 26 01:01:36 2012 +0000 > > >> > > >> powerpc/perf: Move code to select SIAR or pt_regs into perf_read_regs > > >> > > >> I don't know enough about PPC to know what's going on, but reverting > > >> the changes to perf_instruction_pointer() gets me reasonable 'perf > > >> report' output with 3.11. > > > > > > This is an e300 core right ? (603...). Do that have an SIAR at all > > > (Scott ?) > > > > Yes, e300c3. > > Ok so I have a hard time figuring out how that patch can make a > difference since for all I can see, there is no perf backend upstream > for e300 at all :-( > > I must certainly be missing something ... Scott, can you have a look ?
e300c3 has a core-fsl-emb style performance monitor (though Linux doesn't support it yet). If a bug was bisected to a change in core-book3s.c, then it's probably a coincidence due to moving code around. -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
