From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>
To: thomas.falcon@intel.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/perf: Fix ratio_to_prev event parsing test
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 11:12:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <997b6291-7429-4eaa-8467-1fd88e100616@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260324222517.18848-1-thomas.falcon@intel.com>
On 3/25/2026 6:25 AM, thomas.falcon@intel.com wrote:
> From: Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@intel.com>
>
> test__ratio_to_prev() assumed the first event in a group is the leader,
> which is not the case when the event is expanded into two event groups
> on hybrid PMU's with auto counter reload support. This patch updates the
> test to iterate over the event group generated for each core PMU. Also
> update "wrong leader" test to check that the subordinate event has the
> correct leader instead of checking that it is not the group leader.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@intel.com>
> Fixes: 56be0fe5f62c ("perf record: Add auto counter reload parse and regression tests")
> ---
> tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c b/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
> index 1d3cc224fbc2..cd48e6b2bb57 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/parse-events.c
> @@ -1796,31 +1796,38 @@ static bool test__acr_valid(void)
>
> static int test__ratio_to_prev(struct evlist *evlist)
> {
> - struct evsel *evsel;
> + struct evsel *evsel, *leader;
>
> TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong number of entries", 2 * perf_pmus__num_core_pmus() == evlist->core.nr_entries);
>
> - evlist__for_each_entry(evlist, evsel) {
> + for (int i = 0; i < num_core_entries(evlist); i++) {
> + evsel = leader = (i == 0 ? evlist__first(evlist) : evsel__next(evsel));
could we use the "leader" to replace "evsel" for all the "TEST_ASSERT_VAL"
of cycles event? That make code look more clearer. Then the above sentence
can be simplified to this,
```
leader = (i == 0 ? evlist__first(evlist) : evsel__next(evsel));
```
> if (!perf_pmu__has_format(evsel->pmu, "acr_mask"))
> return TEST_OK;
>
> - if (evsel == evlist__first(evlist)) {
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong config2", 0 == evsel->core.attr.config2);
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong leader", evsel__is_group_leader(evsel));
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong core.nr_members", evsel->core.nr_members == 2);
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong group_idx", evsel__group_idx(evsel) == 0);
> - TEST_ASSERT_EVSEL("unexpected event",
> - evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_CPU_CYCLES),
> - evsel);
> - } else {
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong config2", 0 == evsel->core.attr.config2);
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong leader", !evsel__is_group_leader(evsel));
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong core.nr_members", evsel->core.nr_members == 0);
> - TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong group_idx", evsel__group_idx(evsel) == 1);
> - TEST_ASSERT_EVSEL("unexpected event",
> - evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_INSTRUCTIONS),
> - evsel);
> - }
> + /* cycles */
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong config2", 0 == evsel->core.attr.config2);
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong leader", evsel__is_group_leader(evsel));
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong core.nr_members", evsel->core.nr_members == 2);
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong group_idx", evsel__group_idx(evsel) == 0);
> + TEST_ASSERT_EVSEL("unexpected event",
> + evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_CPU_CYCLES),
> + evsel);
> + /*
> + * The period value gets configured within evlist__config,
> + * while this test executes only parse events method.
> + */
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong period", 0 == evsel->core.attr.sample_period);
> +
> + /* instructions/period=200000,ratio-to-prev=2.0/ */
> + evsel = evsel__next(evsel);
and here, the code needs to be changed to
```
evsel = evsel__next(leader);
```
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong config2", 0 == evsel->core.attr.config2);
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong leader", evsel__has_leader(evsel, leader));
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong core.nr_members", evsel->core.nr_members == 0);
> + TEST_ASSERT_VAL("wrong group_idx", evsel__group_idx(evsel) == 1);
> + TEST_ASSERT_EVSEL("unexpected event",
> + evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_INSTRUCTIONS),
> + evsel);
> /*
> * The period value gets configured within evlist__config,
> * while this test executes only parse events method.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-25 3:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-24 22:25 [PATCH] tools/perf: Fix ratio_to_prev event parsing test thomas.falcon
2026-03-25 3:12 ` Mi, Dapeng [this message]
2026-03-25 20:59 ` Falcon, Thomas
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=997b6291-7429-4eaa-8467-1fd88e100616@linux.intel.com \
--to=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=thomas.falcon@intel.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