[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fVRNskkDyw3fr-DTUfFeLv0b+O6uEONQY=xB65X2iRc7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 09:12:51 -0700
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Michael Petlan <mpetlan@...hat.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/14] perf tests: Add parse metric test for ipc metric
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 6:09 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 12:55:44AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 3:43 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Adding new test that process metrics code and checks
> > > the expected results. Starting with easy ipc metric.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
> >
> > Acked-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
> >
> > I wonder if there's a better organization with testing in
> > pmu-events.c, expr.c and now parse-metric.c.
>
> hum, so
> - expr.c is testing core interface,
> - parse-metric is testing specific metric processing from
> parsing to final ratio
> - pmu-events.c is testing pmu events aliases and parsing of
> all the metrics
>
> pmu-events.c is testing both pmu events and metrics,
> but I think it fits in the way it's done together
Agreed, it makes following this a little bit of a challenge. When I
did the parsing in pmu-events I'd originally done it in expr.c for
example. Perhaps if there were a parse-metric in tools/perf/util then
things would align better as well. Just thinking out loud :-)
Thanks,
Ian
> jirka
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists