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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0973C4338F for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 16:06:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4517601FF for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 16:06:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242783AbhHEQGh (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Aug 2021 12:06:37 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:32759 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232283AbhHEQGh (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Aug 2021 12:06:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1628179582; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc; bh=jE7ks8Qkc6R3DmWR8bnWH4oldDmygmCzqjJXXNKHRPQ=; b=UeuHOWdP8kHmVrU4rmUt1mZ51nHo1oOgN6H+dKbwqpUR4jHoL9cuVlQGpXlbvMsIOjLg/N 4vC9gKL/tg/w3BBxmuMAfOcL5vEv0fCok5QG2UTu+suLN/6rz2dwkoCLCDZ2ofnefg91JL 5RzewoM3DzzQw1sa9tQjAVmmarj/Hqc= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-362-QSnBu-y7P_ecKYMVr4hodA-1; Thu, 05 Aug 2021 12:06:20 -0400 X-MC-Unique: QSnBu-y7P_ecKYMVr4hodA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D63FE809CD2; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 16:06:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from Diego.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.208.5]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A274A5D6B1; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 16:06:17 +0000 (UTC) From: Michael Petlan To: acme@redhat.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Cc: jolsa@redhat.com, sumanthk@linux.ibm.com Subject: [PATCH] perf test: Fix bpf test sample mismatch reporting Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 18:06:11 +0200 Message-Id: <20210805160611.5542-1-mpetlan@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org When the expected sample count in the condition changed, the message needs to be changed too, otherwise we'll get: 0x1001f2091d8: mmap mask[0]: BPF filter result incorrect, expected 56, got 56 samples Fixes: 4b04e0decd25 ("perf test: Fix basic bpf filtering test") Signed-off-by: Michael Petlan --- tools/perf/tests/bpf.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c b/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c index dbf5f5215abe..fa03ff0dc083 100644 --- a/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c +++ b/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ static int do_test(struct bpf_object *obj, int (*func)(void), } if (count != expect * evlist->core.nr_entries) { - pr_debug("BPF filter result incorrect, expected %d, got %d samples\n", expect, count); + pr_debug("BPF filter result incorrect, expected %d, got %d samples\n", expect * evlist->core.nr_entries, count); goto out_delete_evlist; } -- 2.18.4