[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fUPZ7+nAcxBp5sFBfxzkOH8kzWkLV0uziHqxYC0cDbbDw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2023 23:42:00 -0700
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.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>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
Jing Zhang <renyu.zj@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Zhengjun Xing <zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ming Wang <wangming01@...ngson.cn>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@....com>,
Dmitrii Dolgov <9erthalion6@...il.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Ali Saidi <alisaidi@...zon.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>,
Kang Minchul <tegongkang@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, coresight@...ts.linaro.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf test amd: Fix build failure with amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
-- Was: Re: [PATCH v5 27/34] perf pmu: Separate pmu and pmus
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 10:30 PM Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com> wrote:
>
> On 27-May-23 12:52 PM, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > Separate and hide the pmus list in pmus.[ch]. Move pmus functionality
> > out of pmu.[ch] into pmus.[ch] renaming pmus functions which were
> > prefixed perf_pmu__ to perf_pmus__.
>
> I'm seeing perf tool build failures on linux-next because a patch[1] went in
> via Peter's tree needed some changes done by this patch.
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/168372562075.404.10852387134590654382.tip-bot2@tip-bot2
>
> Below patch fixes the issue.
>
> From c041b94df00baea024b64d4b19e37ee827484e74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>
> Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2023 15:23:22 +0530
> Subject: [PATCH] perf test amd: Fix build failure with amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
>
> Since amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c was applied via Peter's tree, some of
> the changes came via Arnaldo's tree did not reflected in this file,
> which is causing build failures.
>
> arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c:47:25: error: ‘pmus’ undeclared
> (first use in this function)
> 47 | if (list_empty(&pmus))
> | ^~~~
> arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c:48:17: error: implicit declaration
> of function ‘perf_pmu__scan’; did you mean
> perf_pmus__scan’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 48 | perf_pmu__scan(NULL);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | perf_pmus__scan
> arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c:50:19: error: implicit declaration
> of function ‘perf_pmu__find’; did you mean
> perf_pmus__find’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 50 | ibs_pmu = perf_pmu__find("ibs_op");
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | perf_pmus__find
>
> Fix those.
>
> Fixes: 1eaf496ed386 ("perf pmu: Separate pmu and pmus")
> Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>
> ---
> tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c b/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
> index 2902798ca5c1..1e08b2455725 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
> @@ -44,10 +44,10 @@ int test__amd_ibs_via_core_pmu(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused,
> int ret = TEST_OK;
> int fd, i;
>
> - if (list_empty(&pmus))
> - perf_pmu__scan(NULL);
> + /* No way to know whether pmus list is already populated or not. */
> + perf_pmus__scan(NULL);
Thanks Ravi, you should be able to just remove the 2 lines above. The
code will check to make sure the list is populated for the find below:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/tree/tools/perf/util/pmus.c?h=perf-tools-next#n79
Thanks,
Ian
> - ibs_pmu = perf_pmu__find("ibs_op");
> + ibs_pmu = perf_pmus__find("ibs_op");
> if (!ibs_pmu)
> return TEST_SKIP;
>
> --
> 2.40.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists