From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Olsa Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] RFC perf test 14 add platform dependency Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 11:24:31 +0200 Message-ID: <20170620092431.GA2380@krava> References: <20170613090937.72899-1-tmricht@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170619205944.GA19183@krava> <20170620014036.GF13640@kernel.org> <4349df01-bc7d-32bc-aa31-04c25ab970c1@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4068 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750859AbdFTJYm (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2017 05:24:42 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4349df01-bc7d-32bc-aa31-04c25ab970c1@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-perf-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Thomas-Mich Richter Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Hendrik Brueckner On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:12:14AM +0200, Thomas-Mich Richter wrote: > On 06/20/2017 03:40 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:59:44PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > >> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:09:37AM +0200, Thomas Richter wrote: > >>> This is a proposal to add platform dependency into the > >>> test case 14 (perf_event_attr). It is based on a suggestion from > >>> Jiri Olsa. > >>> Add a new optional attribute named 'machine' in the [config] section > >>> of the test case file. It is a comma separated list of architecture > >>> names this test can be executed on. For example: > >>> > >>> machine = x86_64,alpha,ppc > >> > >> 'arch' sounds better to me, but machine is ok I guess > > > > Agreed, for consistency with other places, like in struct machine, that > > represents virtual and host 'machines' that have an 'arch', etc. > > > > So better to rename "machine" above to "arch". > > > > Ok lets rename it to arch. > > >>> If this attribute is missing the test is executed on any platform. > >>> This does not break the current setup. > >>> The values listed for this attribute should be identical to > >>> uname -m output. > >>> If the list starts with an exclamation mark (!) the comparison is > >>> inverted, for example for > >>> > >>> machine = !s390x,ppc > >>> > >>> the test is not executed on s390x or ppc platforms. > >>> The exclamation mark must be at the beginnning of the list. > >> > >> could that be per arch? this made me think that it's not s390 and it IS for ppc > > > > yeah, having the ! affect just the arch right after it looks more > > flexible and clear. > > > > Does this really have any benefit? Assume > arch = !s390x,ppc > > I will scan the list from left to right and the first match wins. > Checking the first word in the list determines > this test is executed on anything but s390x. So the 2nd word in the > list (ppc) is useless. Specifying more architectures makes only sense > when you negate them such as > arch = !s390x,!ppc ok, makes sense thanks, jirka