[Linuxppc-users] function_graph feature or its alternatives

[Naveen N. Rao]

Paul Menzel wrote:
> Dear Naveen,
> 
> 
> On 07/20/18 11:16, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>> Dan Horák wrote:
>>> On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 10:59:59 +1000 Michael Ellerman wrote:
> 
>>>> "George Chochia" <chochia at us.ibm.com> writes:
> 
>>>> > sending the info: kernel: 4.14.0-49.10.1.el7a.ppc64le
>>>>
>>>> OK, so that explains some of the confusion.
>>>>
>>>> Typically "4.14.0" would mean the upstream "v4.14" tag, ie. the
>>>> version prior to "4.14.1", which is different from what you have
>>>> above.
>>>>
>>>> You need to quote the full version string when talking about distro
>>>> kernels.
>>>>
>>>> If you use `uname -r` that should give you the right thing.
>>>>
>>>> > The config file has > CONFIG_HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER=y
>>>> >
>>>> > but it does not appear in the list of available tracers
>>>>
>>>> The HAVE symbol says that the architecture supports the tracer, but
>>>> not that it's enabled.
>>>>
>>>> As Naveen said you need CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER=y.
>>>>
>>>> It's up to Redhat to decide what tracers they enable.
>>>
>>> but partners and customers can influence such decisions, thus I would
>>> recommend checking it with Red Hat
>> 
>> Indeed, and that has been requested.
> 
> Just to be clear, is there an open issue/ticket for that in the
> Red Hat bug tracker [1]?

For fedora, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1605126, but 
it seems to require a redhat account.

- Naveen