Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] perf timechart io mode

[David Ahern]

On 6/25/14, 5:20 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > > maybe we dont need to fail in this case.. seems like it should
> > > not be hard to detect, wanr and recover? ;-)
> The easiest way is just to bail out and don't try to be smart, that's
> what I do now.
>
> Another approach would be to just convert all my consistency
> checks to warnings and skip invalid events (and hope it somehow works). I
> think it makes sense when for some reason we have perf.data which
> is not really consistent but we still want to get something out of it.

If the event type does not make sense how can you trust any other field 
-- like event size?

> > seems to me it should not be happening at all. It seems like the head caught
> > the tail and was not properly detected.
> So you mean it perf record's fault?

In my cases I am running perf-record. At the end of the session it walks 
the events and in too many cases I see the message:

 0x113f80 [0x8]: failed to process type: 68

So, yes I think something is happening during the record such as the 
writer passing the reader and corrupting the buffers.

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/