> Surely I am getting old and forgetting things, but when I wrote it, my
> intent was to do:
>
> vi a.c
> build it
> perf record a
> vi a.c # change it
> build it
> perf record a
> perf diff
>
> And see if what I did while vi'ing it matched what I thought it would.
You're right of course. As you
Em Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:34:04PM -0800, Andi Kleen escreveu:
> > Having a nice explanation of the problem helps, as my first reaction to
> > this patch was: "What? This is what this tool is supposed to do, to
> > compare two versions of a binary, one that is being developed from the
> > same sour
> Having a nice explanation of the problem helps, as my first reaction to
> this patch was: "What? This is what this tool is supposed to do, to
> compare two versions of a binary, one that is being developed from the
> same source, the other with slight modifications, etc", while the
> description
Em Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 05:39:44AM +, kan.li...@intel.com escreveu:
> From: Kan Liang
> Currently, the perf diff only works with same binaries. That's because
> it compares the symbol start address. It doesn't work if the perf.data
> comes from different binaries. This patch matches the symbol
Em Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 03:14:06PM +, Liang, Kan escreveu:
> Hi Arnaldo,
>
> Could you please review the patch?
> I've already updated the patch description to try to address your concern.
> Please let me know if you have any questions.
Just out of time, sorry, will get to it eventually.
- A
Hi Arnaldo,
Could you please review the patch?
I've already updated the patch description to try to address your concern.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Kan
>
> From: Kan Liang
>
> Currently, the perf diff only works with same binaries. That's because it
> compares the
6 matches
Mail list logo
