Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:18:12 +1100
From: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
        ravi.bangoria@linux.vnet.ibm.com, acme@redhat.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: perf TUI fails with "failed to process type: 64"
Message-ID: <20161010211812.13eb89d5@kryten>
In-Reply-To: <874m4k7q5s.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
References: <20161009121232.174915eb@kryten>
        <874m4k7q5s.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 996
Lines: 38

Hi Michael,

> >  14c00-14c00 g exc_virt_0x4c00_system_call  
>    ^
>    What's this? The address? If so it's wrong?

Offset into the binary I think, there's one 64kB page of ELF gunk at
the start.

> Seems likely. But I can't see why.
> 
> AFAICS we have never emitted a size for those symbols:
> 
> Old:
> $ nm --print-size build/vmlinux | grep -w system_call_relon_pSeries
> c000000000004c00 T system_call_relon_pSeries
> 
> New:
> $ nm --print-size build/vmlinux | grep -w exc_virt_0x4c00_system_call
> c000000000004c00 T exc_virt_0x4c00_system_call
> 
> 
> It also doesn't look like we're emitting another symbol with the same
> address, which has caused confusion in the past:
> 
> Old:
> c000000000004c00 T exc_virt_0x4c00_system_call
> c000000000004d00 T exc_virt_0x4d00_single_step
> 
> New:
> c000000000004c00 T system_call_relon_pSeries
> c000000000004d00 T single_step_relon_pSeries
> 
> So more digging required.

Thanks for checking, it's starting to sound like a perf bug.

Anton