Em Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:40:19PM -0400, Steven Rostedt escreveu: > On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:35:27 -0300 > Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > [root@jouet ~]# perf test openat > > 2: Detect openat syscall event : Ok > > 3: Detect openat syscall event on all cpus : Ok > > 15: syscalls:sys_enter_openat event fields : Ok > > [root@jouet ~]# > > > > [root@jouet ~]# perf trace -e nanosleep,syscalls:*nanosleep sleep 1 > > 0.000 ( ): syscalls:sys_enter_nanosleep:rqtp: 0x7ffd9f737950, > > rmtp: 0x00000000 > > 0.009 ( ): sleep/7905 nanosleep(rqtp: 0x7ffd9f737950 > > ) ... > > 1000.204 ( ): syscalls:sys_exit_nanosleep:0x0 > > 0.009 (1000.217 ms): sleep/7905 ... [continued]: nanosleep()) = 0 > > [root@jouet ~]# > > > > Works, so the regression seems to be fixed, without looking at the code > > that much: > > > > Tested-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]> > > But does this still work on x86_32? I'll test that out. Thanks for > testing, but I may have another patch soon.
I haven't tested that case, no. - Arnaldo
