ickat: den 2 februari 2023 17:26
Till: Beckius, Mikael ; lttng-
d...@lists.lttng.org
Ämne: Re: [lttng-dev] lttng-consumerd crash on aarch64 due to x86 arch
specific optimization
CAUTION: This email comes from a non Wind River email account!
Do not click links or open attachments unless you rec
noyers
> Skickat: den 2 februari 2023 17:26
> Till: Beckius, Mikael ; lttng-
> d...@lists.lttng.org
> Ämne: Re: [lttng-dev] lttng-consumerd crash on aarch64 due to x86 arch
> specific optimization
>
> CAUTION: This email comes from a non Wind River email account!
> Do not c
Hello Mathieu!
Sorry for the late reply. I was away for a few days.
I will have a look at your updated approach and get back to you on your other
replies if still relevant, but in short:
- With __ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED defined 32-bit arm appears to support 2 and 4
bytes unaligned access
- Regard
Hi Mikael,
I just tried another approach to fix this issue, see:
https://review.lttng.org/c/lttng-ust/+/9413 Fix: use unaligned pointer accesses
for lttng_inline_memcpy
It is less intrusive than other approaches, and does not change the generated
code on the
most relevant architectures.
Fee
On 2023-01-31 11:18, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
On 2023-01-31 11:08, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
On 2023-01-30 01:50, Beckius, Mikael via lttng-dev wrote:
Hello Matthieu!
I have looked at this in place of Anders and as far as I can tell
this is not an arm64 issue but an arm issue. And even on arm
On 2023-01-31 11:08, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
On 2023-01-30 01:50, Beckius, Mikael via lttng-dev wrote:
Hello Matthieu!
I have looked at this in place of Anders and as far as I can tell this
is not an arm64 issue but an arm issue. And even on arm
__ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED is 1 so it seems the p
On 2023-01-30 01:50, Beckius, Mikael via lttng-dev wrote:
Hello Matthieu!
I have looked at this in place of Anders and as far as I can tell this is not
an arm64 issue but an arm issue. And even on arm __ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED is 1
so it seems the problem only occurs if size equals 8.
So for A
Hello Matthieu!
I have looked at this in place of Anders and as far as I can tell this is not
an arm64 issue but an arm issue. And even on arm __ARM_FEATURE_UNALIGNED is 1
so it seems the problem only occurs if size equals 8.
In addition I did some performance testing of lttng_inline_memcpy by
Hi Matthieu,
I've retired and no longer have access to any arch64 target to test it on.
Regards
Anders
Den ons 25 jan. 2023 13:25Mathieu Desnoyers
skrev:
> Hi Anders,
>
> Sorry for the long delay on this one, can you have a look at the following
> fix ?
>
> https://review.lttng.org/c/lttng-u
On 2023-01-26 14:32, Anders Wallin wrote:
Hi Matthieu,
I've retired and no longer have access to any arch64 target to test it on.
Thanks for your reply Anders,
I've talked to Henrik and Pär today and they are already testing it out.
Enjoy your retirement :)
Best regards,
Mathieu
--
Math
Hi Anders,
Sorry for the long delay on this one, can you have a look at the following fix ?
https://review.lttng.org/c/lttng-ust/+/9319 Fix: aarch64: do not perform
unaligned stores
If it passes your testing, I'll merge this into lttng-ust.
Thanks,
Mathieu
On 2017-12-28 09:13, Anders Wallin
Hi Mathieu,
I finally got some time to dig into this issue. The crash only happens when
metadata is written AND the size of the metadata will end up in a write
that is 8,4,2 or 1 bytes long AND
that the source or destination is not aligned correctly according to HW
limitation. I have not found any
- On Nov 24, 2017, at 3:23 AM, Anders Wallin wrote:
> Hi,
> architectures that has memory alignment restrictions may/will fail with the
> optimization done in 51b8f2fa2b972e62117caa946dd3e3565b6ca4a3.
> Please revert the patch or make it X86 specific.
Hi Anders,
This was added in the deve
Hi,
architectures that has memory alignment restrictions may/will fail with the
optimization done in 51b8f2fa2b972e62117caa946dd3e3565b6ca4a3.
Please revert the patch or make it X86 specific.
Regards
Anders Wallin
-
14 matches
Mail list logo
