[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220926144948.223641-1-james.clark@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:49:46 +0100
From: James Clark <james.clark@....com>
To: acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
James Clark <james.clark@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] perf test: Fix attr tests for PERF_FORMAT_LOST
I'm not sure what the rule is for backwards compatibility of tests, but
in this case my change will not work on older kernels because I replaced
the previous expected value, rather than adding it as another valid one
with an OR. Like "read_format=4|20"
To me it seems that running the tests is a different workflow than say
someone running Perf itself on older kernels. And if we keep adding to
the valid values in tests, then the tests become less useful over time.
PERF_FORMAT_LOST is not an optional feature so it _should_ always be
present. For that reason I chose to not add it as an extra valid value,
but I'm happy to change it if we think that new tests should also pass
on older kernels.
Thanks
James
James Clark (1):
perf test: Fix attr tests for PERF_FORMAT_LOST
tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record | 2 +-
tools/perf/tests/attr/system-wide-dummy | 2 +-
tools/perf/tests/attr/test-record-group | 4 ++--
tools/perf/tests/attr/test-record-group-sampling | 6 +++---
tools/perf/tests/attr/test-record-group1 | 4 ++--
tools/perf/tests/attr/test-record-group2 | 4 ++--
6 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
--
2.28.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists