Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 18:09:21 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: perf: multiple mmap of fd behavior on x86/ARM
Message-ID: <20170811170921.GC22445@leverpostej>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708101448460.30979@macbook-air>
 <20170811100127.GB12985@leverpostej>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708111114370.2445@macbook-air>
 <20170811162318.GA22445@leverpostej>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708111244570.2445@macbook-air>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708111244570.2445@macbook-air>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 885
Lines: 25

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:51:12PM -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2017, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > Just to check, how does x86 behave on each of those kernel releases?
> > 
> > Many things have changed since v4.4.
> 
> I'm fairly sure this test (well, the equivelent code in 
> tests/record_sample/record_mmap that I based the test on) has been passing 
> on all of my x86 test machines since ~3.10 or so, or else I would noticed.

Ok.

> If I can get a custom kernel to boot on one of my machines I can start 
> digging in and see if I can find where the EINVAL comes from.

>From a quick scan, I can't spot anything obvious that would affect the
arm64 perf mmap behaviour, that has changed since v4.9.

> This isn't some key thing that needs to be fixed, I was just curious about 
> the behavior difference between x86 and ARM. 

Sure; likewise I'm curious.

Thanks,
Mark.