Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1759002AbdLRPXy (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 18 Dec 2017 10:23:54 -0500
Received: from mail-lf0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41]:45218 "EHLO
        mail-lf0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1758835AbdLRPXs (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 18 Dec 2017 10:23:48 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotdxlR/x704yI1KVaFOpRxRzAllMTm1JAVSF9Ark8s8c3GME9FJtS1HgbBDcD2GYseXWR2EAodL+MsiGGVtQDk=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f2ba3aeb-269d-8137-f7b8-13a658bff400@intel.com>
References: <CABPqkBS10uwjVE+_OyYg0mVM8hbhxU9Jr9eBEFF8KQd_3j4SnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171218132821.5gqxtwotgxvpqzy7@ukko.fi.intel.com> <f2ba3aeb-269d-8137-f7b8-13a658bff400@intel.com>
From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 08:23:46 -0700
Message-ID: <CANLsYkzPHqT-ue=Ew9zy0X1RWfjZD2Wy=2XaD4AmzkxMDotYwg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: perf record: regression with latest PT fix
To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1182
Lines: 43

On 18 December 2017 at 07:25, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> wrote:
> On 18/12/17 15:28, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 05:03:53AM -0800, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> The following patch:
>>>
>>> f785657b0fbe perf report: Fix regression when decoding Intel-PT traces
>>
>> Cc'ing Adrian in case he missed the patch.
>
> Doesn't seem to have much to do with Intel PT, but the patch logic looks wrong:
>
>                 ret = perf_evlist__parse_sample_timestamp(evlist, event, &timestamp);
> -               if (ret)
> +               if (ret != -1)
>                         return ret;
>
> Shouldn't that be:
>
>                 ret = perf_evlist__parse_sample_timestamp(evlist, event, &timestamp);
> -               if (ret)
> +               if (ret && ret != -1)
>                         return ret;

Of course!

Ingo, how do you want to proceed?  Should I send a V3?

>
>
>>
>>> is breaking perf report for me. I get no samples reported from perf report
>>> when running simple perf record commands:
>>>
>>> $ perf record -e cycles noploop
>>>
>>> Reverting the patch fixes the problem.
>>>
>>> Are you seeing this as well?
>>
>