Re: [PATCH] dtc: also check for libyaml

On 06/10/2020 08:28 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:08 PM Jiping Ma wrote: On 06/09/2020 10:52 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 10:01 AM Jiping Ma wrote: On 06/09/2020 03:09 AM, Rob Herring wrote: On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2:42 AM Jiping Ma wrote

Re: [PATCH] dtc: also check for libyaml

On 06/09/2020 10:52 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 10:01 AM Jiping Ma wrote: On 06/09/2020 03:09 AM, Rob Herring wrote: On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2:42 AM Jiping Ma wrote: yamltree.c includes , If /usr/include/yaml.h does not exist, it fails to build. Does this patch

Re: [PATCH] dtc: also check for libyaml

On 06/09/2020 03:09 AM, Rob Herring wrote: On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2:42 AM Jiping Ma wrote: yamltree.c includes , If /usr/include/yaml.h does not exist, it fails to build. Does this patch fix your issue?: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20200505100319.741454-1-masahi...@kernel.org

[PATCH] dtc: also check for libyaml

yamltree.c includes , If /usr/include/yaml.h does not exist, it fails to build. Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- scripts/dtc/Makefile | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/scripts/dtc/Makefile b/scripts/dtc/Makefile index b5a5b1c..b49dfea 100644 --- a/scripts/dtc/Makefile +++ b

Re: [PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode

On 05/28/2020 03:54 PM, Will Deacon wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 09:06:07AM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: On 05/27/2020 11:19 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 09:33:00AM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: On 05/26/2020 06:26 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:52:07AM +0800

Re: [PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode

On 05/27/2020 11:19 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 09:33:00AM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: On 05/26/2020 06:26 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:52:07AM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: Modified the patch subject and the change description. PC value is get from regs

Re: [PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode

On 05/26/2020 06:26 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:52:07AM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: Modified the patch subject and the change description. PC value is get from regs[15] in REGS_ABI_32 mode, but correct PC is regs->pc(regs[PERF_REG_ARM64_PC]) in arm64 kernel, which cau

Re: [PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode

On 05/27/2020 03:54 AM, Will Deacon wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 11:26:11AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:52:07AM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: Modified the patch subject and the change description. PC value is get from regs[15] in REGS_ABI_32 mode, but correct PC

Re: [PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode

Hi, Will Please help to review the change. Thanks, Jiping On 05/11/2020 10:52 AM, Jiping Ma wrote: Modified the patch subject and the change description. PC value is get from regs[15] in REGS_ABI_32 mode, but correct PC is regs->pc(regs[PERF_REG_ARM64_PC]) in arm64 kernel, which cau

[PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode

ned-off-by: Jiping Ma --- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c index 0bbac61..0ef2880 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c @@ -32,6 +32,10 @@

[PATCH][V2] perf: perf can not parser the backtrace of app with dwarf mode in the 32bit system and 64bit kernel.

Record PC value from regs[15], it should be regs[32] in REGS_ABI_32 mode, which cause perf parser the backtrace failed. Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kernel

[PATCH] perf: perf can not parser the backtrace of app with dwarf mode in the 32bit system and 64bit kernel.

Record PC value from regs[15], it should be regs[32] in REGS_ABI_32 mode, which cause perf parser the backtrace failed. Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kernel

Re: [PATCH] perf: perf can not parser the backtrace of app in the 32bit system and 64bit kernel.

Hi, Will Please help to review the patch. Thanks, Jiping On 04/29/2020 12:51 PM, Jiping Ma wrote: We test it as the following steps. # gcc -g -mthumb -gdwarf -o test test.c # export CALLGRAPH=dwarf #(./perftest ./test profiling 1; cd ./profiling/; perf script) Thanks, Jiping On 04/29/2020

[PATCH] perf: perf can not parser the backtrace of app with dwarf mode in the 32bit system and 64bit kernel.

Record PC value from regs[15], it should be regs[32] in REGS_ABI_32 mode, which cause perf parser the backtrace failed. Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kernel

Re: [PATCH] perf: perf can not parser the backtrace of app in the 32bit system and 64bit kernel.

We test it as the following steps. # gcc -g -mthumb -gdwarf -o test test.c # export CALLGRAPH=dwarf #(./perftest ./test profiling 1; cd ./profiling/; perf script) Thanks, Jiping On 04/29/2020 12:01 PM, Jiping Ma wrote: Record PC value from regs[15], it should be regs[32], which cause perf

[PATCH] perf: perf can not parser the backtrace of app in the 32bit system and 64bit kernel.

Record PC value from regs[15], it should be regs[32], which cause perf parser the backtrace failed. Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c index 0bbac61

Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] tracing/arm64: Have max stack tracer handle the case of return address after data

ons. Link: 20190802094103.163576-1-jiping@windriver.com Reported-by: Jiping Ma Acked-by: Will Deacon Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) --- arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h | 13 + kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 14 ++ 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+) diff --git a/

Re: [PATCH v3] tracing: Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

On 2019年08月03日 00:09, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 11:22:59 -0400 Steven Rostedt wrote: I think you are not explaining the issue correctly. From looking at the document, I think what you want to say is that the LR is saved *after* the data for the function. Is that correct? If

[PATCH v3] tracing: Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

16) 856 352 load_module+0x1d50/0x2340 17) 504 504 sys_finit_module+0xd0/0xe8 Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 28 ++-- 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c index

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

On 2019年08月01日 17:41, Will Deacon wrote: On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 04:33:40PM +0800, Jiping Ma wrote: In arm64, the PC of the frame is matched to the last frame function, rather than the function of his frame. For the following example, the stack size of occupy_stack_init function should

[PATCH v2] tracing: Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

+0x7c/0xb8 [kernel_stack] 13) 4424 3376 occupy_stack_init+0x7c/0xc0 [kernel_stack] 14) 1048 144 do_one_initcall+0x68/0x248 15) 904 48 do_init_module+0x60/0x1f0 16) 856 352 load_module+0x1d50/0x2340 17) 504 504 sys_finit_module+0xd0/0xe8 Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 28

[PATCH] Function stack size and its name mismatch in arm64

The PC of one the frame is matched to the next frame function, rather than the function of his frame. Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 28 ++-- 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c b/kernel

[PATCH] EDAC, ie31200: Add Intel Corporation 3rd Gen Core processor

3rd Gen Core seems to work just like Skylake. Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma --- drivers/edac/ie31200_edac.c | 5 + 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/edac/ie31200_edac.c b/drivers/edac/ie31200_edac.c index aac9b9b..1445336 100644 --- a/drivers/edac/ie31200_edac.c +++ b/drivers

Review request for edac: ie31200: Add Intel Corporation 3rd Gen Core processor

9a5001c8840928c3b51bc330a078524dff4d9be5 (HEAD -> master) Author: Jiping Ma Date: Mon Jun 17 13:36:20 2019 +0800 EDAC, ie31200: Add Intel Corporation 3rd Gen Core processor 3rd Gen Core seems to work just like Skylake. Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma Thanks, Jiping