From: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
To: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
"linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Jin Yao <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: perf tool: About tests debug level
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 09:00:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fU05k62d57pbWquqv3Z1RFzWMOB1d3OFEcEax5btEWEzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cd501541-deb5-f2f5-e086-cca44b40c87d@huawei.com>
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 4:58 AM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> On 22/06/2021 06:04, Ian Rogers wrote:
> >> ---- end ----
> >> Parse and process metrics: FAILED!
> >>
> >> Note that the "FAILED" messages from the test code come from pr_debug().
> >>
> >> In a way, I feel that pr_debug()/err from the test is more important
> >> than pr_debug() from the core code (when running a test).
> >>
> >> Any opinion on this or how to improve (if anyone agrees with me)? Or am
> >> I missing something? Or is it not so important?
> > Hi John,
> >
>
> Hi Ian,
>
> > I think the issue is that in the parsing you don't know it's broken
> > until something goes wrong. Putting everything on pr_err would cause
> > spam in the not broken case.
>
> Right, I would not suggest using pr_err everywhere.
>
> > Improving the parsing error handling is a
> > big task with lex and yacc to some extent getting in the way. Perhaps
> > a middle way is to have a parameter to the parser that logs more, and
> > recursively call this in the parser when parsing fails. I guess there
> > is also a danger of a performance hit.
>
> So I am thinking that for running a test, -v means different levels logs
> for test code and for core (non-test code). For example, -v prints
> pr_warn() and higher for test logs, but nothing for core logs. And then
> -vv for running a test gives pr_debug and above for test logs, and
> pr_warn and above for core logs. Or something like that.
>
> Maybe that is not a good idea. But I'm just saying that it's hard to
> debug currently at -v for tests.
>
> Thanks,
> John
I think this sounds good. It'd be nice also to have verbose output in
the shell tests following the same convention. There's currently no
verbose logging in shell tests but I propose it here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210621215648.2991319-1-irogers@google.com/
By their nature some of the shell tests launch perf, perhaps there can
be some convention on passing the verbose flag through in those cases.
Thanks,
Ian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-22 16:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-21 11:20 perf tool: About tests debug level John Garry
2021-06-22 5:04 ` Ian Rogers
2021-06-22 11:52 ` John Garry
2021-06-22 16:00 ` Ian Rogers [this message]
2021-06-22 17:42 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
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='CAP-5=fU05k62d57pbWquqv3Z1RFzWMOB1d3OFEcEax5btEWEzg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=irogers@google.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--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=yao.jin@linux.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).