Fixed relative address in LNT profile control-flow graph.

[kpdev42]

Summary

It seems the relative address in AArch64 disassembly is dec, not hex.

[tnfchris]

lnt/server/ui/static/lnt_profile.js

140–144

Thanks for the patch! How about checking for the 0x to determine whether it's dec or hex. This would be more robust. and do the same for the absolute address part below.

[kpdev42]

Choose base depending on address string format

[kpdev42]

lnt/server/ui/static/lnt_profile.js

140–144

Thank you for review, please check these changes )

[tnfchris]

Thanks! looks good to me but @thopre do you know what's up with the CI?

[thopre]

In D110141#3011990, @tnfchris wrote:

Thanks! looks good to me but @thopre do you know what's up with the CI?

I think the base commit is not in the repo that runs the CI. See what happened to me before I run git fetch:

% git show 6a3f7bbaa221aa13acb72947363acbc95a1bf583:lnt/server/ui/static/lnt_profile.js
fatal: Path 'lnt/server/ui/static/lnt_profile.js' exists on disk, but not in '6a3f7bbaa221aa13acb72947363acbc95a1bf583'

[thopre]

Can you rebase the patch @kpdev42 ?

[kpdev42]

Hm... this patch is on top of 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad ( https://github.com/llvm/llvm-lnt/commit/6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad )
And file lnt/server/ui/static/lnt_profile.js is presented there for sure
Maybe I did something wrong when created this revision and now this patch cannot be applied properly

[tnfchris]

Hmm 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad is a very odd commit... why did that go in without any reviews..

[tnfchris]

This is weird, your base commit is on https://reviews.llvm.org/rLNT6a3f7bbaa221aa13acb72947363acbc95a1bf583, but 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad was identical to this original change.

[kpdev42]

Yep, I think it is better for me to resubmit revision

[thopre]

In D110141#3012355, @tnfchris wrote:

This is weird, your base commit is on https://reviews.llvm.org/rLNT6a3f7bbaa221aa13acb72947363acbc95a1bf583, but 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad was identical to this original change.

Ah that's probably why it fails. I've reverted 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad. Did you push 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad by mistake @slydiman ? I'll revert it and land this change

[kpdev42]

I think it is no need to revert 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad - it looks like right solution
I've moved my changes to https://reviews.llvm.org/D110174

[thopre]

In D110141#3012486, @kpdev42 wrote:

I think it is no need to revert 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad - it looks like right solution
I've moved my changes to https://reviews.llvm.org/D110174

Argh sorry too late. Should I revert everything then or are we all good?

[tnfchris]

In D110141#3012518, @thopre wrote:

In D110141#3012486, @kpdev42 wrote:

I think it is no need to revert 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad - it looks like right solution
I've moved my changes to https://reviews.llvm.org/D110174

Argh sorry too late. Should I revert everything then or are we all good?

No it's fine , we're good now. I don't like 6ba06570364b936c6bfb631e9d2e4f1374446bad because it assumes consistencies between disassemblers which is not the case.

[kpdev42]

Yes, thank you @thopre @tnfchris

lnt/server/ui/static/lnt_profile.js

 
 
 CFG.prototype = {
     // The following method will have different implementations depending
     // on the profiler, or kind of profiling input.
     convertToAddress: function (addressString, addressCurrent) {
       // If the address starts with '#' it is a relative one
       // and should be processed differently
-      if (addressString.startsWith('#'))
-          return addressCurrent + parseInt(addressString.substring(1), 16);
+      var isRelative = addressString.startsWith('#');
+      var charOffset = (isRelative ? 1 : 0);
+      var base = (addressString.substring(charOffset).startsWith('0x') ? 16 : 10);
+      if (isRelative)
+          return addressCurrent + parseInt(addressString.substring(1), base);
       else
-          return parseInt(addressString, 16);
+          return parseInt(addressString, base);
     },
 
     parseDisassembly: function(counter) {
         var instructions = [];
         for (var i=0; i<this.disassembly.length; ++i) {
             var profiled_instruction = this.disassembly[i];
             var counter2weight = profiled_instruction[0];
             var address = profiled_instruction[1];