linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] perf test amd: Fix build failure with amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZH3w7TWRQZsPqhB2@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 5 Jun 2023 11:27:57 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     irogers@...gle.com, suzuki.poulose@....com, mike.leach@...aro.org,
        leo.yan@...aro.org, john.g.garry@...cle.com, will@...nel.org,
        james.clark@....com, mingo@...hat.com, mark.rutland@....com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
        namhyung@...nel.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com, kjain@...ux.ibm.com,
        renyu.zj@...ux.alibaba.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com,
        zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com, maddy@...ux.ibm.com,
        atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, wangming01@...ngson.cn,
        chenhuacai@...nel.org, sandipan.das@....com, 9erthalion6@...il.com,
        seanjc@...gle.com, robh@...nel.org, tmricht@...ux.ibm.com,
        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 v2] perf test amd: Fix build failure with
 amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c

Em Sat, Jun 03, 2023 at 10:16:50AM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu:
> Since amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c was applied via Peter's tree, some of
> the changes came via Arnaldo's tree did not reflect 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>

I wonder how to solve the various merge issues here:

1. this clashes with:

commit ae4aa00a1a9358e0007f6edc71b018a0b0d21190
Author: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Date:   Tue May 2 15:38:27 2023 -0700

    perf test: Move x86 hybrid tests to arch/x86

--------------

I tried cherry-picking the cset that introduces amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c,
moved the test__hybrid lines a bit and then tried test merging the
result with tip/master, it works.

But then I tried applying this fix as a follow up cset, perf-tools-next
would have bisection history broken, but nah, but then I hit:

⬢[acme@...lbox perf-tools-next]$ git merge tip/master
Auto-merging tools/perf/arch/x86/include/arch-tests.h
Auto-merging tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/Build
Auto-merging tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
Auto-merging tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/arch-tests.c
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
⬢[acme@...lbox perf-tools-next]$ git diff
diff --cc tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
index 78b1902f6f59d8ce,2902798ca5c1ed1c..0000000000000000
--- a/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
+++ b/tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c
@@@ -44,7 -44,10 +44,14 @@@ int test__amd_ibs_via_core_pmu(struct t
        int ret = TEST_OK;
        int fd, i;
  
++<<<<<<< HEAD
 +      ibs_pmu = perf_pmus__find("ibs_op");
++=======
+       if (list_empty(&pmus))
+               perf_pmu__scan(NULL);
+ 
+       ibs_pmu = perf_pmu__find("ibs_op");
++>>>>>>> tip/master
        if (!ibs_pmu)
                return TEST_SKIP;
  

How are things like this resolved in linux-next?

Removing this test from tip/master and I carry a fixed up
tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c introduction patch?

Cheers,

- Arnaldo

> ---
> v1->v2:
>   - Remove unnecessary perf_pmus__scan(NULL) as suggested by Ian.
> 
>  tools/perf/arch/x86/tests/amd-ibs-via-core-pmu.c | 5 +----
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 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..78b1902f6f59 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 +44,7 @@ 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);
> -
> -	ibs_pmu = perf_pmu__find("ibs_op");
> +	ibs_pmu = perf_pmus__find("ibs_op");
>  	if (!ibs_pmu)
>  		return TEST_SKIP;
>  
> -- 
> 2.40.1
> 

-- 

- Arnaldo