From: Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
acme@kernel.org, irogers@google.com, sumanthk@linux.ibm.com,
eranian@google.com
Cc: svens@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, hca@linux.ibm.com,
Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH V2] perf test: Test 17 fails with make LIBPFM4=1 on s390 z/VM
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 11:00:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210521090004.42991-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
Version 2:
As suggested by Ian Rogers make perf_event_attribute member
exclude_hv more robust and accept value 0 or 1 to handle more
test cases which might fail on s390 virtual machine z/VM.
This test case fails on s390 virtual machine z/VM which has no PMU support
when the perf tool is built with LIBPFM4=1.
Using make LIBPFM4=1 builds the perf tool with support for libpfm
event notation. The command line flag --pfm-events is valid:
# ./perf record --pfm-events cycles -- true
[ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.001 MB perf.data (2 samples) ]
#
However the command 'perf test -Fv 17' fails on s390 z/VM virtual machine
with LIBPFM4=1:
# perf test -Fv 17
17: Setup struct perf_event_attr :
--- start ---
.....
running './tests/attr/test-record-group2'
unsupp './tests/attr/test-record-group2'
running './tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period'
expected exclude_hv=0, got 1
FAILED './tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period' - match failure
---- end ----
Setup struct perf_event_attr: FAILED!
When --pfm-event system is not supported, the test returns unsupported
and continues. Here is an example using a virtual machine on x86 and
Fedora 34:
[root@f33 perf]# perf test -Fv 17
17: Setup struct perf_event_attr :
--- start ---
.....
running './tests/attr/test-record-group2'
unsupp './tests/attr/test-record-group2'
running './tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period'
unsupp './tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period'
....
The issue is file ./tests/attr/test-record-pfm-period
which requires perf event attribute member exclude_hv to be zero.
This is not the case on s390 where the value of exclude_hv is one when
executing on a z/VM virtual machine without PMU hardware support.
Fix this by allowing value exlucde_hv to be zero or one.
Output before:
# /usr/bin/python ./tests/attr.py -d ./tests/attr/ -t \
test-record-pfm-period -p ./perf -vvv 2>&1| fgrep match
matching [event:base-record]
match: [event:base-record] matches []
FAILED './tests/attr//test-record-pfm-period' - match failure
#
Output after:
# /usr/bin/python ./tests/attr.py -d ./tests/attr/ -t \
test-record-pfm-period -p ./perf -vvv 2>&1| fgrep match
matching [event:base-record]
match: [event:base-record] matches ['event-1-0-6', 'event-1-0-5']
matched
Background:
Using libpfm library ends up in this function call sequence
pfm_get_perf_event_encoding()
+-- pfm_get_os_event_encoding()
+-- pfmlib_perf_event_encode()
is called when no hardware specific PMU unit can be detected
as in the s390 z/VM virtual machine case. This uses the
"perf_events generic PMU" data structure which sets exclude_hv
to 1 per default. Using this PMU that test case always fails.
That is the reason why exclude_hv attribute setting varies.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>
Suggested-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
---
tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record b/tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record
index 4a7b8deef3fd..8c10955eff93 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/attr/base-record
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ pinned=0
exclusive=0
exclude_user=0
exclude_kernel=0|1
-exclude_hv=0
+exclude_hv=0|1
exclude_idle=0
mmap=1
comm=1
--
2.31.1
reply other threads:[~2021-05-21 9:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20210521090004.42991-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com \
--to=tmricht@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sumanthk@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=svens@linux.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).