[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230628105303.4053478-1-james.clark@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2023 11:53:01 +0100
From: James Clark <james.clark@....com>
To: linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, acme@...nel.org,
masahiroy@...nel.org, leo.yan@...aro.org, broonie@...nel.org,
Aishwarya.TCV@....com
Cc: 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>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v1 0/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs
Changes since RFC:
* Changed arch filename convention to use the ARCH= build time values
instead of uname
It seems like there were no objections on the RFC, apart from maybe
changing the perf tests to run as a kself test. But that's probably not
going to happen for a while, if ever, and these fragments can always
be moved in that case.
James Clark (1):
perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs
tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README | 7 +++++++
tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64 | 1 +
tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config | 11 +++++++++++
3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config
base-commit: ad5f604e186ac08d12c401e34ea96c09c38ddbc5
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists