[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210528091050.245838-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 11:10:50 +0200
From: Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
acme@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com, acme@...hat.com
Cc: svens@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com, sumanthk@...ux.ibm.com,
hca@...ux.ibm.com, Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH V2][Ping] perf test: Test 17 fails with make LIBPFM4=1 on s390 z/VM
Version 2:
As suggested by Ian Rogers make perf_event_attribute member
exclude_hv more robust and accept value 0 or 1 to handle more
test cases which might fail on s390 virtual machine z/VM.
This test case fails on s390 virtual machine z/VM which has no PMU support
when the perf tool is built with LIBPFM4=1.
Using make LIBPFM4=1 builds the perf tool with support for libpfm
event notation. The command line flag --pfm-events is valid:
# ./perf record --pfm-events cycles -- true
[ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.001 MB perf.data (2 samples) ]
#
However the command 'perf test -Fv 17' fails on s390 z/VM virtual machine
with LIBPFM4=1:
# perf test -Fv 17
17: Setup struct perf_event_attr :
--- start ---
.....
running './tests/attr/test-record-group2'
unsupp './tests/attr/test-record-group2'
running './tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period'
expected exclude_hv=0, got 1
FAILED './tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period' - match failure
---- end ----
Setup struct perf_event_attr: FAILED!
When --pfm-event system is not supported, the test returns unsupported
and continues. Here is an example using a virtual machine on x86 and
Fedora 34:
[root@f33 perf]# perf test -Fv 17
17: Setup struct perf_event_attr :
--- start ---
.....
running './tests/attr/test-record-group2'
unsupp './tests/attr/test-record-group2'
running './tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period'
unsupp './tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period'
....
The issue is file ./tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period
which requires perf event attribute member exclude_hv to be zero.
This is not the case on s390 where the value of exclude_hv is one when
executing on a z/VM virtual machine without PMU hardware support.
Fix this by allowing value exlucde_hv to be zero or one.
Output before:
# /usr/bin/python ./tests/attr.py -d ./tests/attr/ -t \
test-record-pfm-period -p ./perf -vvv 2>&1| fgrep match
matching [event:base-record]
match: [event:base-record] matches []
FAILED './tests/attr//test-record-pfm-period' - match failure
#
Output after:
# /usr/bin/python ./tests/attr.py -d ./tests/attr/ -t \
test-record-pfm-period -p ./perf -vvv 2>&1| fgrep match
matching [event:base-record]
match: [event:base-record] matches ['event-1-0-6', 'event-1-0-5']
matched
Background:
Using libpfm library ends up in this function call sequence
pfm_get_perf_event_encoding()
+-- pfm_get_os_event_encoding()
+-- pfmlib_perf_event_encode()
is called when no hardware specific PMU unit can be detected
as in the s390 z/VM virtual machine case. This uses the
"perf_events generic PMU" data structure which sets exclude_hv
to 1 per default. Using this PMU that test case always fails.
That is the reason why exclude_hv attribute setting varies.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>
Suggested-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
---
tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record b/tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record
index 4a7b8deef3fd..8c10955eff93 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ pinned=0
exclusive=0
exclude_user=0
exclude_kernel=0|1
-exclude_hv=0
+exclude_hv=0|1
exclude_idle=0
mmap=1
comm=1
--
2.31.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists