On 9/11/12 9:11 AM, Robert Richter wrote:
On 11.09.12 08:32:55, David Ahern wrote:
My guess would be /usr/include/bits/errno.h:
/* Linux has no ENOTSUP error code. */
# define ENOTSUP EOPNOTSUPP
Ok, so ENOTSUP is actually the same as EOPNOTSUPP. Since the syscall
returns a EOPNOTSUPP, I pref
On 11.09.12 08:32:55, David Ahern wrote:
> My guess would be /usr/include/bits/errno.h:
>
> /* Linux has no ENOTSUP error code. */
> # define ENOTSUP EOPNOTSUPP
Ok, so ENOTSUP is actually the same as EOPNOTSUPP. Since the syscall
returns a EOPNOTSUPP, I prefer this when checking perf_event_open(
On 9/11/12 8:01 AM, Robert Richter wrote:
Ok, wrong question. Better would have been: Did you run it on a
non-pebs Intel machine of an non-ibs AMD machine?
Intel: yes. VM for example. All the servers I have now are Nehalem or
better - ie., with a PEBS.
AMD: no. I do not have any AMD-based s
On 11.09.12 07:22:32, David Ahern wrote:
> On 9/11/12 3:20 AM, Robert Richter wrote:
> > On 10.09.12 10:40:16, David Ahern wrote:
> >> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> >> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> >> @@ -294,6 +294,11 @@ try_again:
> >> perf_evsel__
On 9/11/12 3:20 AM, Robert Richter wrote:
On 10.09.12 10:40:16, David Ahern wrote:
--- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
+++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
@@ -294,6 +294,11 @@ try_again:
perf_evsel__name(pos));
rc = -err;
On 10.09.12 10:40:16, David Ahern wrote:
> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> @@ -294,6 +294,11 @@ try_again:
> perf_evsel__name(pos));
> rc = -err;
> goto out;
>
6 matches
Mail list logo