At Thu, 17 Apr 2014 13:32:21 +0200,
Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:15:29AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Il 24/03/2014 21:49, Christian Borntraeger ha scritto:
> > > event_legacy_tracepoint:
> > >+PE_NAME '-' PE_NAME ':' PE_NAME
> > >+{
> > >+ struct parse_events_evlist *data = _data;
> > >+ struct list_head *list;
> > >+ char sys_name[strlen($1) + strlen($3) + 2];
> > >+ sprintf(&sys_name, "%s-%s", $1, $3);
> > >+
> > >+ ALLOC_LIST(list);
> > >+ ABORT_ON(parse_events_add_tracepoint(list, &data->idx, &sys_name, $5));
> > >+ $$ = list;
> > >+}
> >
> > Why isn't '-' part of PE_NAME?
>
> hi Paolo ;-)
>
> because it screws cache events parsing.. we need some code factoring
> in this part
>
> Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> it'd be nice to add test to tests/parse-events.c, probably s390 specific,
> because the parsing code touches the tracepoint format file
>
Hi,
Hmm, looks like we can't simply add arch-specific test:
--- a/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
@@ -1346,6 +1346,12 @@ static struct evlist_test test__events[] = {
.name = "{cycles,cache-misses,branch-misses}:D",
.check = test__pinned_group,
},
+#if defined(__s390x__)
+ [42] = {
+ .name = "kvm-s390:kvm_s390_create_vm",
+ .check = test__checkevent_tracepoint,
+ },
+#endif /* and what will be the next number: 42 or 43? */
};
static struct evlist_test test__events_pmu[] = {
Because it breaks explicit numbering of test__events[].
I can suggest to move numeration into evlist_test, i.e.
--- a/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
@@ -1174,25 +1174,30 @@ static int test__all_tracepoints(struct perf_evlist *evlist)
struct evlist_test {
const char *name;
__u32 type;
+ int index;
int (*check)(struct perf_evlist *evlist);
};
static struct evlist_test test__events[] = {
- [0] = {
+ {
.name = "syscalls:sys_enter_open",
.check = test__checkevent_tracepoint,
+ .index = 0;
},
...
or just to remove it?
How do you think?
And a bit of offtopic :)
Apparently, s390 doesn't have syscalls:*, so some of the tests
don't work properly (or maybe I missed something? I set CONFIG_FTRACE_SYSCALLS
to 'y' in my config: still no syscalls:*).
What do you think about this idea:
--- a/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
@@ -1177,13 +1177,21 @@ struct evlist_test {
int (*check)(struct perf_evlist *evlist);
};
+#if !defined(__s390x__)
+#define TP_SYS_NAME "syscalls"
+#define TP_EVENT_NAME "sys_enter_open"
+#else
+#define TP_SYS_NAME "sched"
+#define TP_EVENT_NAME "sched_wakeup"
+#endif
+
static struct evlist_test test__events[] = {
[0] = {
- .name = "syscalls:sys_enter_open",
+ .name = TP_SYS_NAME ":" TP_EVENT_NAME,
.check = test__checkevent_tracepoint,
},
... and so on?
Also, test_pmu() looks at /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cpu/
but instead of "cpu/" on s390 there are "cpum_sf/" and "cpum_cf/",
so pmu tests don't work either..
Thanks
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
