[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fVfc1RQO_OnSFAU4rtKfSTiWpS5PghovFjuPxruty19LQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 21:27:19 -0700
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Jing Zhang <renyu.zj@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
James Clark <james.clark@....com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Zhuo Song <zhuo.song@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Shuai Xue <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] perf test: Make matching_pmu effective
On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 1:36 AM Jing Zhang <renyu.zj@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>
> The perf_pmu_test_event.matching_pmu didn't work. No matter what its
> value is, it does not affect the test results. So let matching_pmu be
> used for matching perf_pmu_test_pmu.pmu.name.
Could you rebase this onto the latest perf-tools-next, I'd like to test this.
Thanks,
Ian
> Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <renyu.zj@...ux.alibaba.com>
> Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
> ---
> tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c | 9 +++++++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c b/tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c
> index 1dff863b..3204252 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c
> @@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ struct perf_pmu_test_pmu {
> },
> .alias_str = "event=0x2b",
> .alias_long_desc = "ddr write-cycles event. Unit: uncore_sys_ddr_pmu ",
> - .matching_pmu = "uncore_sys_ddr_pmu",
> + .matching_pmu = "uncore_sys_ddr_pmu0",
> };
>
> static const struct perf_pmu_test_event sys_ccn_pmu_read_cycles = {
> @@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ struct perf_pmu_test_pmu {
> },
> .alias_str = "config=0x2c",
> .alias_long_desc = "ccn read-cycles event. Unit: uncore_sys_ccn_pmu ",
> - .matching_pmu = "uncore_sys_ccn_pmu",
> + .matching_pmu = "uncore_sys_ccn_pmu4",
> };
>
> static const struct perf_pmu_test_event *sys_events[] = {
> @@ -599,6 +599,11 @@ static int __test_uncore_pmu_event_aliases(struct perf_pmu_test_pmu *test_pmu)
> struct pmu_event const *event = &test_event->event;
>
> if (!strcmp(event->name, alias->name)) {
> + if (strcmp(pmu_name, test_event->matching_pmu)) {
> + pr_debug("testing aliases uncore PMU %s: mismatched matching_pmu, %s vs %s\n",
> + pmu_name, test_event->matching_pmu, pmu_name);
> + continue;
> + }
> if (compare_alias_to_test_event(alias,
> test_event,
> pmu_name)) {
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists