Re: [PATCH v2] tools: perf: tests: Fix code reading for riscv

From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tools: perf: tests: Fix code reading for riscv
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2025 13:51:59 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z3gVrzFd_2cacOFD@x1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z3dBGM5L41v0RlZf@ghost>

On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 05:44:56PM -0800, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 05:52:24PM -0800, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 05:20:15PM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > Yeah I agree. This test case did end up being interesting though as it
> > unconvered this change in behavior of objdump on riscv, but that's
> > tangential to the purpose of this test case. We need this patch on riscv
> > to stop this test from failing, but it is also reasonable to approach
> > this differently and not use objdump at all.

> What's the next step here? Would you prefer to get rid of this test
> entirely? I sent out a v3 that uses uname [1].

> Link
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241219-perf_fix_riscv_obj_reading-v3-1-a7d644dcfa50@rivosinc.com/
> [1]

I'm ok with this latest version and added it to perf-tools-next,
changing the patch subject line to:

  perf tests code-reading: Handle change in objdump output from binutils >= 2.41 on riscv

Ok?

- Arnaldo