From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CECBDC433EF for ; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 17:35:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:From:References:CC:To:Subject: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=/9nt2dMoSQKhrCZI0DiUArIxXlzYQztREul+vKOMtbI=; b=nZG/uf1EE5loQO XPSO7wBb4Q2gxz+pOErhK52wdLmbk2s2NVTx0KHKnoUHhAD8r1wDHZbylD/aKWx8ImSgh24dGvWug zsAmKPYL0Kpk93Mf+Y4WRr02rIuB2tfKNfXNV9tdyaHYqoENv5BPrVIw1CcBkTNc6qTF4QazvTkMM if2qwiYRfWyM72m8VUCOnQviwNJ9NrP8wc8oyvDTUHjQwN0ku2yjPBiCCTutvbv1O2Rs4kbdBW47j b33ScJRsXHiqTzWyssYEX5EEtFKNp6BDSjMnpK2PMzw1Qm6793Yv9I9eqENTvM22/UcKQUAcG/h8f C8KhOgmKaykbMW4tmygw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nKkfu-00Basm-Rx; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 17:34:39 +0000 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com ([185.176.79.56]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nKkfo-00BaqS-Ut for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 17:34:36 +0000 Received: from fraeml734-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.226]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4K01zl5F86z67Z2N; Fri, 18 Feb 2022 01:29:55 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) by fraeml734-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.215) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.21; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:34:26 +0100 Received: from [10.47.86.67] (10.47.86.67) by lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.21; Thu, 17 Feb 2022 17:34:25 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 17:34:23 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf test: Skip Sigtrap test for arm+aarch64 To: Marco Elver CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Thomas Richter References: <1645114959-119064-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> From: John Garry In-Reply-To: X-Originating-IP: [10.47.86.67] X-ClientProxiedBy: lhreml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.65) To lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220217_093433_301858_CBB5C87A X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.69 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 17/02/2022 16:45, Marco Elver wrote: > On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 17:28, John Garry wrote: + Ian, Thomas >> >> Skip the Sigtrap test for arm + arm64, same as was done for s390 in >> commit a840974e96fd ("perf test: Test 73 Sig_trap fails on s390"). >> >> As described by Will at [0], in the test we get stuck in a loop of handling >> the HW breakpoint exception and never making progress. GDB handles this >> by stepping over the faulting instruction, but with perf the kernel is >> expected to handle the step (which it doesn't for arm). >> >> Dmitry made an attempt to get this work, also mentioned in the same thread >> as [0], which was appreciated. But the best thing to do is skip the test >> for now. >> >> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/20220118124343.GC98966@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s/T/#m13b06c39d2a5100d340f009435df6f4d8ee57b5a >> >> Fixes: Fixes: 5504f67944484 ("perf test sigtrap: Add basic stress test for sigtrap handling") >> Signed-off-by: John Garry >> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c b/tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c >> index 1f147fe6595f..3f0b5c1398b5 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c >> @@ -29,7 +29,8 @@ >> * Just disable the test for these architectures until these issues are >> * resolved. >> */ >> -#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__) >> +#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__) || \ >> + defined(__arm__) || defined(__aarch64__) >> #define BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED 0 >> #else >> #define BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED 1 > > This is now equivalent to BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED > tools/perf/tests/tests.h -- and different from the original > BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED (and makes me wonder why > BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED wasn't just used from the beginning). Perhaps > just use BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED. > We currently have BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED defined now in 2x locations: tests/sigtrap.c tests/bp_account.c bp_account works for arm64, and we don't want to skip that test. So, as long as the macro meaning is appropriate, we can reuse BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED for sigtrap.c Thanks, John _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel