On 23/04/14 13:45, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 07:43:50PM +0400, Alexander Yarygin wrote:
[...]
>> 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:*).
Strange, on my system I have syscall trace points on s390.
Maybe some additional dependency of CONFIG_FTRACE_SYSCALLS that is not catched
via Kconfig?
>>
>> 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?
>
> that looks fine.. also we could use just generic tracepoints
> like the 'sched' ones
I think generic tracepoints are preferred over ifdef, but as I said I have syscalls.
Christian
Christian
--
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
