From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-05-31 17:10:30
|
Bugs item #3309794, was opened at 2011-05-31 12:10 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: Bad use of time_t as a type for sample header mtime field Initial Comment: The size of the mtime field in the op_header is based on whether oprofile is built 32-bit or 64-bit. So if you have an oparchive from a system where oprofile was built, say, as 64-bit and try to run reports on that profile data on a different system where oprofile was built as 32-bit, you're likely to see strange results and/or error messages. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2011-06-01 15:24:03
|
Bugs item #3309794, was opened at 2011-05-31 12:10 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: Bad use of time_t as a type for sample header mtime field Initial Comment: The size of the mtime field in the op_header is based on whether oprofile is built 32-bit or 64-bit. So if you have an oparchive from a system where oprofile was built, say, as 64-bit and try to run reports on that profile data on a different system where oprofile was built as 32-bit, you're likely to see strange results and/or error messages. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-06-01 10:24 Message: The error that I see when I run into this problem is: "opreport error: Attempt to process a Cell Broadband Engine SPU profile withoutproper BFD support" This is because the 32-bit opreport is looking at the "wrong" offset in the header for the spu_profile field and finding a non-zero number there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2012-07-03 21:09:52
|
Bugs item #3309794, was opened at 2011-05-31 10:10 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: Bad use of time_t as a type for sample header mtime field Initial Comment: The size of the mtime field in the op_header is based on whether oprofile is built 32-bit or 64-bit. So if you have an oparchive from a system where oprofile was built, say, as 64-bit and try to run reports on that profile data on a different system where oprofile was built as 32-bit, you're likely to see strange results and/or error messages. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2012-07-03 14:09 Message: I posted a patch to the list for review. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-06-01 08:24 Message: The error that I see when I run into this problem is: "opreport error: Attempt to process a Cell Broadband Engine SPU profile withoutproper BFD support" This is because the 32-bit opreport is looking at the "wrong" offset in the header for the spu_profile field and finding a non-zero number there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2012-07-19 12:39:38
|
Bugs item #3309794, was opened at 2011-05-31 10:10 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: Bad use of time_t as a type for sample header mtime field Initial Comment: The size of the mtime field in the op_header is based on whether oprofile is built 32-bit or 64-bit. So if you have an oparchive from a system where oprofile was built, say, as 64-bit and try to run reports on that profile data on a different system where oprofile was built as 32-bit, you're likely to see strange results and/or error messages. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2012-07-19 05:39 Message: The patch was committed on July 11, 2012. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2012-07-03 14:09 Message: I posted a patch to the list for review. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-06-01 08:24 Message: The error that I see when I run into this problem is: "opreport error: Attempt to process a Cell Broadband Engine SPU profile withoutproper BFD support" This is because the 32-bit opreport is looking at the "wrong" offset in the header for the spu_profile field and finding a non-zero number there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2012-08-27 19:31:35
|
Bugs item #3309794, was opened at 2011-05-31 10:10 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by maynardj You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Assigned to: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Summary: Bad use of time_t as a type for sample header mtime field Initial Comment: The size of the mtime field in the op_header is based on whether oprofile is built 32-bit or 64-bit. So if you have an oparchive from a system where oprofile was built, say, as 64-bit and try to run reports on that profile data on a different system where oprofile was built as 32-bit, you're likely to see strange results and/or error messages. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2012-07-19 05:39 Message: The patch was committed on July 11, 2012. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2012-07-03 14:09 Message: I posted a patch to the list for review. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maynard Johnson (maynardj) Date: 2011-06-01 08:24 Message: The error that I see when I run into this problem is: "opreport error: Attempt to process a Cell Broadband Engine SPU profile withoutproper BFD support" This is because the 32-bit opreport is looking at the "wrong" offset in the header for the spu_profile field and finding a non-zero number there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=116191&aid=3309794&group_id=16191 |