Re: [PATCH] perf test: Fix test case 120 and 121 for s390

[Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>]

On 3/6/26 17:53, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2026 at 7:52 AM Jan Polensky <japo@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 08:10:02AM +0100, Thomas Richter wrote:
>>> Perf tests
>>> 120: 'perf data convert --to-ctf' command test
>>> 121: 'perf data convert --to-json' command test
>>> fail on s390. It is caused by selecting the default event cycles
>>> which does not exist on s390 z/VM. Use software event cpu-clock
>>> and specify it explicitly on the command line.
>>>
>>> Output before:
>>> ❯ perf test 120 121
>>> 120: 'perf data convert --to-ctf' command test       : FAILED!
>>> 121: 'perf data convert --to-json' command test      : FAILED!
>>>
>>> Output after:
>>> ❯ perf test 120 121
>>> 120: 'perf data convert --to-ctf' command test       : Ok
>>> 121: 'perf data convert --to-json' command test      : Ok
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>
>> [snip]
>> Thanks for providing this, Thomas!
>> Tested-by: Jan Polensky <japo@linux.ibm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Jan Polensky <japo@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> Should we not fallback for the cycles as a default event?
> https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/builtin-record.c#n1374
> https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/tree/tools/perf/util/evsel.c#n3792
> 
> Thanks,
> Ian
> 


The fallback should be cpu-clock in case hardware event cycles (or CPU_CYCLES on s390) does not exist.

Thanks Thomas
-- 
Thomas Richter, Dept 3303, IBM s390 Linux Development, Boeblingen, Germany
--
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH

Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Wolfgang Wendt

Geschäftsführung: David Faller

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294