On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 11:12:58AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 07:07:29AM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu:well it works, but it means that bpf file cannot contains any directory
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 03:41:51PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 09:27:11AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:Ok. If it works it's fine for me.
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 12:30:52PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:hm, both works for me with the change:
On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 01:06:05PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:I tried similar patches, but I always ran into more complex
Em Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:56:43PM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu:right, it looks like we allow whole path (including / char)
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Hi Wang, Jiri,
There are still problems with BPF misinterpreting some events
that include .c. An earlier fix made it work for stand alone
aliases, but it still fails for more complex constructs.
Can you please take a look at this and see if there is something
we can do to help Andi?
- Arnaldo
REJECT keeps trying and trying a shorter string until
.c is matched and it appears like a valid BPF path.
% perf stat -e cpu/uops_executed.core,cmask=1/ true
bpf: builtin compilation failed: -95, try external compiler
ERROR: problems with path cpu/uops_executed.c: No such file or directory
event syntax error: 'cpu/uops_executed.core,cmask=1/'
\___ Failed to load cpu/uops_executed.c from source: Error when compiling BPF scriptlet
I tried to fix it, but it exceeds my flex knowledge, because
REJECT does not interact well with BEGIN states.
The BPF syntax in its current form really causes an ambigious
grammar.
for BPF file, which messes up with out pmu/.../ syntax
do we need that? (Cc-ed some bpf folks)
if not attached patch seems to fix things.. otherwise
we need to come up with another fix
situations where it still matched incorrectly.
e.g. try it with cpu/uops_executed.core,... vs uops_executed.core
perf stat -e cpu/uops_executed.core/ ls
perf stat -e uops_executed.core ls
part.. which im not sure is ok with bpf folks ;-) anyone?