Re: Next release OProfile-1.1

On 05/31/2015 09:10 PM, William Cohen wrote:
> On 05/29/2015 07:42 PM, Carl E. Love wrote:
>> On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 11:40 -0400, William Cohen wrote:
>>> Hello OProfile community,
>>>
>>> It has be almost a year since the last OProfile release. There have
>>> been several fixes checked into the OProfile git repository.  It
>>> would be nice to have these improvements packaged in a release.  I
>>> plan to put out a release candidate in mid-June.  If there are
>>> additional fixes or support for additional processors that should be
>>> included in this release, please let me know as soon as possible.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Will
>>
>>
>> Will:
>>
>> FYI, I pulled down the latest Git tree of OProfile this afternoon and
>> tried to compile it on Power.  It failed to compile:
>>
>> g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I..  -I ../libutil -I ../libutil++ -I ../libop -I ../libpe_utils -I ../libperf_events   -W -Wall -fno-common -ftemplate-depth-50 -Werror -g -O2 -MT op_pe_utils.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/op_pe_utils.Tpo -c -o op_pe_utils.o op_pe_utils.cpp
>> op_pe_utils.cpp: In function ‘bool _get_codes_for_match(unsigned int, const char*, std::vector<operf_event, std::allocator<operf_event> >*)’:
>> op_pe_utils.cpp:678: error: ‘pfm_get_event_code’ was not declared in this scope
>> op_pe_utils.cpp:679: error: ‘PFMLIB_SUCCESS’ was not declared in this scope
>> op_pe_utils.cpp: In function ‘bool convert_event_vals(std::vector<operf_event, std::allocator<operf_event> >*)’:
>> op_pe_utils.cpp:800: error: ‘PFMLIB_SUCCESS’ was not declared in this scope
>> op_pe_utils.cpp:803: error: ‘pfm_get_num_events’ was not declared in this scope
>> op_pe_utils.cpp:804: error: ‘PFMLIB_SUCCESS’ was not declared in this scope
>> op_pe_utils.cpp:808: error: ‘pfm_get_event_name’ was not declared in this scope
>> op_pe_utils.cpp:809: error: ‘PFMLIB_SUCCESS’ was not declared in this scope
>> make[2]: *** [op_pe_utils.o] Error 1
>>
>> When I grep the source for "pfm_get_event_code" I see the use of it in op_pe_utils.cpp
>> but I do not find a definition of the function.  I will look into the issue further and
>> get back with you.
>>
>> Note, it compiled OK on my 64-bit Intel laptop.
>>
>>                  Carl Love
>>
> 
> Carl,
> 
> Thanks for trying trying things out on PPC.  What particular distribution of Linux was being run on the PPC and what version of libpfm is on the machine? Looking through /usr/include/perfmon/*.h don't see that being defined on Fedora21. Doing a "get blame" on ./libpe_utils/op_pe_utils.cpp show the following commit adding the PFMLIB_SUCCESS
> 
> commit 8846630b3b2b2a6555d98d388e97bfae496f5222
> Author: Maynard Johnson <[email protected]>
> Date:   Thu Jul 18 13:41:02 2013 -0500
> 
>     Add various utility routines needed by new ocount tool
>     
>     Signed-off-by: Maynard Johnson <[email protected]>
> 
> It looks like this would have been in oprofile-0.9.9 and newer.  I am wondering how that worked in the past.
> 
> -Will

Actually PFM_SUCCESS is in /usr/include/perfmon/pfmlib.h:

#define PFM_SUCCESS		0	/* success */

Could you run the following and look through the op_pe_utils.i to see where it is gettint the pfmlib.h file?

g++ --save-temps -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I..  -I ../libutil -I ../libutil++ -I ../libop -I ../libpe_utils -I ../libperf_events   -W -Wall -fno-common -ftemplate-depth-50 -Werror -g -O2 -MT op_pe_utils.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/op_pe_utils.Tpo -c -o op_pe_utils.o op_pe_utils.cpp

If this is on a RHEL6 system, you might need to take special steps to get the proper pfmlib.h because it is in /usr/lib64/papi-5.1.1/usr/include/perfmon/pfmlib.h

-Will

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
oprofile-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oprofile-list