Stephane, I don't know whether or not it matters in this case, but I believe Michael is also using a system with the older perfmon kernel bits.
Tony Stephane Eranian wrote: > Michael, > > I did the following test on Montecito REL4U5: > - pull libpfm and pfmon from CVS > - compile libpfm > - compile pfmon as static with PFMROOTDIR pointed at my libpfm dir > > All libpfm old examples runs for Montecito. > > Then for pfmon, I tried something very close to your cmdline: > $ ./pfmon --system-wide --smpl-outfile=/tmp/sample.out.31070 > --smpl-entries=100 -u -k --short-smpl-periods=15940000 --smpl-module=compact > --events=CPU_OP_CYCLES_ALL --cpu-list=0 -- dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null > count=10000 > > And it did not complain about anything. > > I do not have a Madison system with the same OS, so I cannot really > reproduce your environment. Somehow I still think there is something > wrong with the compile/runtime environment. > _______________________________________________ perfmon mailing list [email protected] http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/perfmon/
