Re: [PATCH] perf test: Run test 126 exclusive

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s):
- [Medium] The commit message demonstrates flawed validation of the fix. By marking the test as `(exclusive)`, its numerical test ID changed because exclusive tests are deferred and sorted differently in `perf test`. In the 'Output after' section, the author runs `perf test 126 128`, but the output shows this executed entirely different tests ('perf trace exit race' and 'mmap interface tests') rather than the intended 'perf trace BTF general tests'. Thus, the provided proof of the fix is invalid.
--

commit c35ec49c9966f472a5d232107254f8f61709b80f
Author: Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>

perf test: Run test 126 exclusive

This commit marks the 'perf trace BTF general tests' shell script as
exclusive to prevent it from failing when run concurrently with other
trace tests.

> Output after:
>  # for i in $(seq 3); do perf test 126 128; done
>  126: perf trace exit race                           : Ok
>  128: mmap interface tests                           :
>  128.1: Read samples using the mmap interface        : Ok

Does this validation output demonstrate the correct tests being run?

In the first output block of the commit message, test 126 is 'perf trace
BTF general tests' and 128 is 'perf trace record and replay'. In this later
output block, 126 is 'perf trace exit race' and 128 is 'mmap interface tests'.

Did adding the exclusive tag shift the numeric test IDs, causing the
validation command to run unrelated tests instead of verifying the fix
for the intended BTF general tests?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260408110707.1455185-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com?part=1