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,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 CF766C433EF for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 13:21:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B89ED60E94 for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 13:21:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1355108AbhIINWi (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2021 09:22:38 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36120 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1355402AbhIINNm (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2021 09:13:42 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3B61560FDA; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 12:42:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1631191333; bh=laRVYVuDgyl6pUUGhtgE2ffQq061G7xDKK4KK8DRMp8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=FAtmdsvWx0eoSFpsBvbMkg+lZu6MpAo0lXWpEBvUjTPRU9iNHMQmM+LWEzVG5kQFL GHWGIg7YZ97QdWn73Vxs2POtx0eJE8o+AP0K87oT7eIvzH639a1VQKqZQWxvcxwtz2 OPWKJD8MhnIvoQsm8NzGYJZwHinJbZ6XgJygOlW4n1LHPDmMpjplOANS7251DUVlYG +pvKGH/3N+j8aciDxpU3ZLwSroR7MMf815dz1JbDW92cM94AZpU7gq50Pj/mMvj3rB 83K+m3MGTdjsVTWPydikCFD09ZdfcuGVOfezmU8+X9xTbrAl4LjjUUQbEu2aZOJKtt Wh0q8RGv+Gmcg== Received: by quaco.ghostprotocols.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E12374038F; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 09:42:09 -0300 (-03) Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 09:42:09 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Michael Petlan Cc: acme@redhat.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, jolsa@redhat.com, sumanthk@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf test: Fix bpf test sample mismatch reporting Message-ID: References: <20210805160611.5542-1-mpetlan@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Em Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 04:26:31PM +0200, Michael Petlan escreveu: > Hi Arnaldo, please have a look. > This is still valid. > Thanks. > Michael Looks correct, thanks for resending, applied. - Arnaldo > On Thu, 5 Aug 2021, Michael Petlan wrote: > > 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 > > > > -- - Arnaldo