Re: why is perf-report asking for objdump path?

[David Ahern]

On 11/1/12 7:11 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>  From f0a9d6303f83452c8b6f81081abae8fdf9c81778 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Namhyung Kim<namhyung.kim@xxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 09:48:17 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] perf tools: Use normalized arch name for searching objdump
>   path
>
> David reported that perf report for i686 target data on x86_64 host
> failed to work because it tried to find out cross-compiled objdump.
>
> However objdump for x86_64 is compatible to i686 so that it doesn't
> need to do it at all.  To prevent similar artifacts, normalize arch
> name when comparing host and file architectures.

This fixes the i686 perf.data file analyzed on x86_64. I don't have time 
for the reverse - partly because I needed to verify my other point on 
this bug report: why does objdump path matter for non-annotate commands? 
Before this patch I can analyze 32-bit ppc files on x86 (an important 
use case on my end). After the objdump patch it fails -- or rather, I 
have to add the --objdump argument which is awkward. I don't want to 
have to educate users to add a non-sensical argument to perf-report (and 
other specialized commands).

David

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/