[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200211134704.GB93194@krava>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:47:04 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, will@...nel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
linuxarm@...wei.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, suzuki.poulose@....com,
james.clark@....com, zhangshaokun@...ilicon.com,
robin.murphy@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 5/7] perf pmu: Support matching by sysid
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 04:22:56PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> Hi jirka,
>
> >
> > > + fclose(file);
> > > + pr_debug("gets failed for file %s\n", path);
> > > + free(buf);
> > > + return NULL;
> > > + }
> > > + fclose(file);
> > > +
> > > + /* Remove any whitespace, this could be from ACPI HID */
> > > + s = strlen(buf);
> > > + for (i = 0; i < s; i++) {
> > > + if (buf[i] == ' ') {
> > > + buf[i] = 0;
> > > + break;
> > > + };
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return buf;
> > > +}
> > > +
>
> I have another series to add kernel support for a system identifier sysfs
> entry, which I sent after this series:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/1580210059-199540-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com/
>
> It is different to what I am relying on here - it uses a kernel soc driver
> for firmware ACPI PPTT identifier. Progress is somewhat blocked at the
> moment however and I may have to use a different method:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20200128123415.GB36168@bogus/
I'll try to check ;-)
>
> > > +static char *perf_pmu__getsysid(void)
> > > +{
> > > + char *sysid;
> > > + static bool printed;
> > > +
> > > + sysid = getenv("PERF_SYSID");
> > > + if (sysid)
> > > + sysid = strdup(sysid);
> > > +
> > > + if (!sysid)
> > > + sysid = get_sysid_str();
> > > + if (!sysid)
> > > + return NULL;
> > > +
> > > + if (!printed) {
> > > + pr_debug("Using SYSID %s\n", sysid);
> > > + printed = true;
> > > + }
> > > + return sysid;
> > > +}
> >
> > this part is getting complicated and AFAIK we have no tests for it
> >
> > if you could think of any tests that'd be great.. Perhaps we could
> > load 'our' json test files and check appropriate events/aliasses
> > via in pmu object.. or via parse_events interface.. those test aliases
> > would have to be part of perf, but we have tests compiled in anyway
>
> Sorry, I don't fully follow.
>
> Are you suggesting that we could load the specific JSONs tables for a system
> from the host filesystem?
I wish to see some test for all this.. I can only think about having
'test' json files compiled with perf and 'perf test' that looks them
up and checks that all is in the proper place
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists