From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: thomas.falcon@intel.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/perf: Fix ratio_to_prev event parsing test
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 11:12:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <997b6291-7429-4eaa-8467-1fd88e100616@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260324222517.18848-1-thomas.falcon@intel.com>
On 3/25/2026 6:25 AM, thomas.falcon@intel.com wrote:
> From: Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@intel.com>
>
> test__ratio_to_prev() assumed the first event in a group is the leader,
> which is not the case when the event is expanded into two event groups
> on hybrid PMU's with auto counter reload support. This patch updates the
> test to iterate over the event group generated for each core PMU. Also
> update "wrong leader" test to check that the subordinate event has the
> correct leader instead of checking that it is not the group leader.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@intel.com>
> Fixes: 56be0fe5f62c ("perf record: Add auto counter reload parse and regression tests")
> ---
> tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c b/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
> index 1d3cc224fbc2..cd48e6b2bb57 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
> @@ -1796,31 +1796,38 @@ static bool test__acr_valid(void)
>
> static int test__ratio_to_prev(struct evlist *evlist)
> {
> - struct evsel *evsel;
> + struct evsel *evsel, *leader;
>
> TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong number of entries", 2 * perf_pmus__num_core_pmus() == evlist->core.nr_entries);
>
> - evlist__for_each_entry(evlist, evsel) {
> + for (int i = 0; i < num_core_entries(evlist); i++) {
> + evsel = leader = (i == 0 ? evlist__first(evlist) : evsel__next(evsel));
could we use the "leader" to replace "evsel" for all the "TEST_ASSERT_VAL"
of cycles event? That make code look more clearer. Then the above sentence
can be simplified to this,
```
leader = (i == 0 ? evlist__first(evlist) : evsel__next(evsel));
```
> if (!perf_pmu__has_format(evsel->pmu, "acr_mask"))
> return TEST_OK;
>
> - if (evsel == evlist__first(evlist)) {
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong config2", 0 == evsel->core.attr.config2);
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong leader", evsel__is_group_leader(evsel));
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong core.nr_members", evsel->core.nr_members == 2);
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong group_idx", evsel__group_idx(evsel) == 0);
> - TEST_ASSERT_EVSEL("unexpected event",
> - evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_CPU_CYCLES),
> - evsel);
> - } else {
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong config2", 0 == evsel->core.attr.config2);
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong leader", !evsel__is_group_leader(evsel));
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong core.nr_members", evsel->core.nr_members == 0);
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong group_idx", evsel__group_idx(evsel) == 1);
> - TEST_ASSERT_EVSEL("unexpected event",
> - evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_INSTRUCTIONS),
> - evsel);
> - }
> + /* cycles */
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong config2", 0 == evsel->core.attr.config2);
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong leader", evsel__is_group_leader(evsel));
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong core.nr_members", evsel->core.nr_members == 2);
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong group_idx", evsel__group_idx(evsel) == 0);
> + TEST_ASSERT_EVSEL("unexpected event",
> + evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_CPU_CYCLES),
> + evsel);
> + /*
> + * The period value gets configured within evlist__config,
> + * while this test executes only parse events method.
> + */
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong period", 0 == evsel->core.attr.sample_period);
> +
> + /* instructions/period=200000,ratio-to-prev=2.0/ */
> + evsel = evsel__next(evsel);
and here, the code needs to be changed to
```
evsel = evsel__next(leader);
```
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong config2", 0 == evsel->core.attr.config2);
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong leader", evsel__has_leader(evsel, leader));
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong core.nr_members", evsel->core.nr_members == 0);
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong group_idx", evsel__group_idx(evsel) == 1);
> + TEST_ASSERT_EVSEL("unexpected event",
> + evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_INSTRUCTIONS),
> + evsel);
> /*
> * The period value gets configured within evlist__config,
> * while this test executes only parse events method.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-25 3:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-24 22:25 [PATCH] tools/perf: Fix ratio_to_prev event parsing test thomas.falcon
2026-03-25 3:12 ` Mi, Dapeng [this message]
2026-03-25 20:59 ` Falcon, Thomas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=997b6291-7429-4eaa-8467-1fd88e100616@linux.intel.com \
--to=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=thomas.falcon@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.