linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] perf test: Update ftrace test to use --graph-opts

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z37Xm6sM_UQfHOxW@x1>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 16:52:59 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>,
	James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] perf test: Update ftrace test to use --graph-opts

On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 02:43:52PM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> I found it failed on machines with limited memory because 16M byte
> per-cpu buffer is too big.  The reason it added the option is not to
> miss tracing data.  Thus we can limit the data size by reducing the
> function call depth instead of increasing the buffer size to handle the
> whole data.
> 
> As it used the same option in the test_ftrace_trace() and it was able
> to find the sleep function, it should work with the profile subcommand.
> 
> Get rid of other grep commands which might be affected by the depth
> change.
> 
> Cc: Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>

Hey, I think we should convert the above Cc: to:

Reported-by: Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>

As I think you became aware of this situation from a patch proposed by
Thomas?

I'm also CCing a few other folks that were CCed in Thomas patch, also
CCed here.

- Arnaldo

> Reviewed-by: James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> ---
>  tools/perf/tests/shell/ftrace.sh | 5 +----
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/shell/ftrace.sh b/tools/perf/tests/shell/ftrace.sh
> index 2df05052c324a21c..c243731d2fbf67aa 100755
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/shell/ftrace.sh
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/shell/ftrace.sh
> @@ -67,11 +67,8 @@ test_ftrace_latency() {
>  
>  test_ftrace_profile() {
>      echo "perf ftrace profile test"
> -    perf ftrace profile -m 16M sleep 0.1 > "${output}"
> +    perf ftrace profile --graph-opts depth=5 sleep 0.1 > "${output}"
>      grep ^# "${output}"
> -    grep sleep "${output}"
> -    grep schedule "${output}"
> -    grep execve "${output}"
>      time_re="[[:space:]]+1[[:digit:]]{5}\.[[:digit:]]{3}"
>      # 100283.000 100283.000 100283.000          1   __x64_sys_clock_nanosleep
>      # Check for one *clock_nanosleep line with a Count of just 1 that takes a bit more than 0.1 seconds
> -- 
> 2.47.1.613.gc27f4b7a9f-goog