[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z1nlLM0JJqEwxRFx@google.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:17:00 -0800
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.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>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, akanksha@...ux.ibm.com,
maddy@...ux.ibm.com, atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
kjain@...ux.ibm.com, disgoel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
hbathini@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] perf test expr: Fix system_tsc_freq for only x86
On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 04:20:57PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 06:23:05PM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > The refactoring of tool PMU events to have a PMU then adding the expr
> > literals to the tool PMU made it so that the literal system_tsc_freq
> > was only supported on x86. Update the test expectations to match -
> > namely the parsing is x86 specific and only yields a non-zero value on
> > Intel.
>
> Namhyung,
>
> Since you see no more problems and Athira tested it, I think
> this should go via perf-tools, right?
Yep, will do.
Thanks,
Namhyung
Powered by blists - more mailing lists