linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf test: Check test suite description only

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: <aGQ7xzAQpRUghD35@google.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 12:49:27 -0700
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	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
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf test: Check test suite description only

On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 08:51:53AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 4:32 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Currently perf test checks the given string with descriptions for both
> > test suites and cases (subtests).  But sometimes it's confusing since
> > the subtests don't contain the important keyword.
> >
> > I think it's better to check the suite level and run the whole suite
> > together.
> >
> > Before:
> >   $ perf test hwmon
> >   (no output)
> >
> > After:
> >   $ perf test hwmon
> >    10: Hwmon PMU                                                       :
> >    10.1: Basic parsing test                                            : Ok
> >    10.2: Parsing without PMU name                                      : Ok
> >    10.3: Parsing with PMU name                                         : Ok
> 
> This is better, thanks!
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/tests/builtin-test.c | 4 ----
> >  1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/builtin-test.c b/tools/perf/tests/builtin-test.c
> > index 80375ca39a37a256..dfaff4185eb05a1a 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/tests/builtin-test.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/tests/builtin-test.c
> > @@ -567,10 +567,6 @@ static int __cmd_test(struct test_suite **suites, int argc, const char *argv[],
> >
> >                         for (unsigned int run = 0; run < runs_per_test; run++) {
> >                                 test_suite__for_each_test_case(*t, curr_test_case) {
> > -                                       if (!perf_test__matches(test_description(*t, curr_test_case),
> > -                                                               curr_suite, argc, argv))
> > -                                               continue;
> > -
> 
> This will change the behavior so that if a sub-test matches but the
> test suite as a whole doesn't the whole test suite will now be run.
> For example:
> 
> ```
> $ perf test list
> ...
>  39: CPU map
> 39.1: Synthesize cpu map
> 39.2: Print cpu map
> 39.3: Merge cpu map
> 39.4: Intersect cpu map
> 39.5: Equal cpu map
> ...
> $ perf test -v "Equal cpu map"
> 39.5: Equal cpu map                                                 : Ok
> ```
> 
> whereas with this change the whole of the "CPU map" test suite will be
> run. I think the condition:
> 
> ```
> if (!perf_test__matches(test_description(*t, curr_test_case),
> curr_suite, argc, argv))
> ```
> 
> should  be:
> 
> ```
> if (!perf_test__matches(test_description(*t, curr_test_case),
> curr_suite, argc, argv) &&
>     !perf_test__matches(test_description(*t, -1), curr_suite, argc, argv))
> ```
> 
> But you could avoid computing the extra perf_test__matches with a
> boolean as that test is done immediately before.

Oh, I overlooked the condition in the loop.  Will check the both can
skip if it only matched to some subtests.

Thanks,
Namhyung