Messages in this thread | | | From | Ravi Bangoria <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf test: Skip test 68 for Powerpc | Date | Thu, 10 Dec 2020 11:22:49 +0530 |
| |
On 12/9/20 11:19 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 10:32:33PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: >> On 12/8/20 8:13 PM, Thomas Richter wrote: >>> On 12/7/20 5:35 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >>>> Em Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 03:04:53PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: >>>>> On 11/19/20 7:20 PM, Kajol Jain wrote: >>>>>> Commit ed21d6d7c48e6e ("perf tests: Add test for PE binary format support") >>>>>> adds a WINDOWS EXE file named tests/pe-file.exe, which is >>>>>> examined by the test case 'PE file support'. As powerpc doesn't support >>>>>> it, we are skipping this test. > >>>>>> Result in power9 platform before this patach: >>>>>> [command]# ./perf test -F 68 >>>>>> 68: PE file support : Failed! > >>>>>> Result in power9 platform after this patch: >>>>>> [command]# ./perf test -F 68 >>>>>> 68: PE file support : Skip > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kajol Jain <kjain@linux.ibm.com> > >>>>> Reviewed-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com> > >>>> But why is it failing? I.e. what is that > >>>> perf test -v -F 68 > >>>> outputs? > >>>> Using 'perf report' on a perf.data file containing samples in such >>>> binaries, collected on x86 should work on whatever workstation a >>>> developer uses. > >>>> Say, on a MacBook aarch64 one can look at a perf.data file collected on >>>> a x86_64 system where Wine running a PE binary was present. > >>> What is the distro you are using? >>> I observed the same issue on s390 but this was fixed for fedora33 somehow. >>> The error just went away after a dnf update.... > >>> [root@m35lp76 perf]# cat /etc/fedora-release >>> Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) >>> [root@m35lp76 perf]# ./perf test -F 68 >>> 68: PE file support : Ok >>> [root@m35lp76 perf]# > >>> However on my fedora32 machine it still fails: >>> [root@t35lp46 perf]# cat /etc/fedora-release >>> Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two) >>> [root@t35lp46 perf]# ./perf test -F 68 >>> 68: PE file support : FAILED! >>> [root@t35lp46 perf]# >>> >>> Note that I am running the same kernel on both machines: linux 5.10.0rc7 downloaded >>> this morning. >>> >> >> Ok that's interesting. I don't see that on powerpc. >> >> Fedora 32 with 5.10.0-rc2+ kernel: >> >> $ ./perf test -vv -F 68 >> 68: PE file support : >> --- start --- >> filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. >> FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:40 Failed to read build_id >> ---- end ---- >> PE file support: FAILED! >> >> Fedora 33 with 5.10.0-rc3 kernel: >> >> $ ./perf test -vv -F 68 >> 68: PE file support : >> --- start --- >> filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. >> FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:40 Failed to read build_id >> ---- end ---- >> PE file support: FAILED! >> >> Ubuntu 18.04.5 with 4.15.0-126-generic kernel: >> >> $ ./perf test -vv -F 68 >> 68: PE file support : >> --- start --- >> filename__read_build_id: cannot read ./tests/pe-file.exe bfd file. >> FAILED tests/pe-file-parsing.c:41 Failed to read build_id >> ---- end ---- >> PE file support: FAILED! >> >> >> I assumed bfd is not capable to parse PE files on powerpc. Though, >> I didn't check it in more detail. I'll look into it tomorrow. > > Humm, so this is something related to installation? I.e. that > pe-file.exe isn't being found... > > It first assumes that the developers are in the tools/perf/ directory, > can you please add the patch below and see if it helps?
I'm using upstream perf from tools/perf/
I checked bfd code and it's bfd_check_format() who is returning error "bfd_error_file_not_recognized".
I cross verified with objdump as well:
On x86:
$ objdump -d ./tests/pe-file.exe ./tests/pe-file.exe: file format pei-x86-64
Disassembly of section .text:
0000000000401000 <__mingw_invalidParameterHandler>: 401000: c3 retq 401001: 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 data16 nopw %cs:0x0(%rax,%rax,1) 401008: 00 00 00 00 40100c: 0f 1f 40 00 nopl 0x0(%rax)
On powerpc:
$ objdump -d ./tests/pe-file.exe objdump: ./tests/pe-file.exe: file format not recognized
Objdump is also returning *same* error.
I dig more into bfd logs and found that Powerpc PE support was removed recently (Jul 2020) with this commit: https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=fe49679d5193f6ff7cfd333e30883d293112a3d1
Ravi
| |