RE: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] Xenoprof passive domain support fixes

["DaSilva, Rosilmildo" <rosilmildo.dasilva@xxxxxxx>]

Ray,
A 64bit guest would never have any entry on pvmlinux?, since the code on
opd_kernel.c, line 112 ( of oprofile ), hardcodes the addresses in the
range of 0xC0100000 - 0xC060000. The 64bits guest has a complete
different range.

Renato, seu nome parece um nome Brasileiro.
Rosimildo. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Bryant [mailto:raybry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 9:01 AM
To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Santos, Jose Renato G; Yang, Xiaowei; DaSilva, Rosilmildo
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] Xenoprof passive domain support
fixes

Renato,

BTW, the HVM guest I am running (and hence the passive image) is a
64-bit 
guest.   We've run experiments with 32 bit guests and we do get pvmlinux

samples.    There may be other differences between these experiments,
but 
this is the only one we've been able to identify thus far.   

So perhaps there is something broken about kernel samples in a passive
domain 
and 64 bit?

-- 
Ray Bryant
AMD Performance Labs                   Austin, Tx
512-602-0038 (o)                 512-507-7807 (c)



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel