[PATCH v1 0/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

[PATCH v1 0/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

[James Clark]

Changes since RFC:

 * Changed arch filename convention to use the ARCH= build time values
   instead of uname

It seems like there were no objections on the RFC, apart from maybe
changing the perf tests to run as a kself test. But that's probably not
going to happen for a while, if ever, and these fragments can always
be moved in that case.

James Clark (1):
  perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README |  7 +++++++
 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64  |  1 +
 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config | 11 +++++++++++
 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
 create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
 create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config


base-commit: ad5f604e186ac08d12c401e34ea96c09c38ddbc5
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH v1 1/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

[James Clark]

Defconfig doesn't give full coverage for a perf test run, so these can
be merged with defconfig to do so. It's not complete yet, but is a
starting point as a place to add to when a specific test needs something
extra to run.

Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
---
 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README |  7 +++++++
 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64  |  1 +
 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config | 11 +++++++++++
 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
 create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
 create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config

diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README b/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..fe7de5d93674
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+This folder is for kernel config fragments that can be merged with
+defconfig to give full test coverage of a perf test run. This is only
+an optimistic set as some features require hardware support in order to
+pass and not skip.
+
+'config' is shared across all platforms, and for arch specific files,
+the file name should match that used in the ARCH=... make option.
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64 b/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..64c4ab17cd58
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+CONFIG_CORESIGHT_SOURCE_ETM4X=y
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config b/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..c340b3195fca
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS=y
+CONFIG_STACKTRACE=y
+CONFIG_NOP_TRACER=y
+CONFIG_RING_BUFFER=y
+CONFIG_EVENT_TRACING=y
+CONFIG_CONTEXT_SWITCH_TRACER=y
+CONFIG_TRACING=y
+CONFIG_GENERIC_TRACER=y
+CONFIG_FTRACE=y
+CONFIG_FTRACE_SYSCALLS=y
+CONFIG_BRANCH_PROFILE_NONE=y
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

[Namhyung Kim]

Hi James,

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:53 AM James Clark <james.clark@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Changes since RFC:
>
>  * Changed arch filename convention to use the ARCH= build time values
>    instead of uname
>
> It seems like there were no objections on the RFC, apart from maybe
> changing the perf tests to run as a kself test. But that's probably not
> going to happen for a while, if ever, and these fragments can always
> be moved in that case.

I missed the RFC, sorry.  Could you please add a link for that?

Thanks,
Namhyung


>
> James Clark (1):
>   perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs
>
>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README |  7 +++++++
>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64  |  1 +
>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config | 11 +++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config
>
>
> base-commit: ad5f604e186ac08d12c401e34ea96c09c38ddbc5
> --
> 2.34.1
>

Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

[James Clark]

On 29/06/2023 23:03, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi James,
> 
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:53 AM James Clark <james.clark@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Changes since RFC:
>>
>>  * Changed arch filename convention to use the ARCH= build time values
>>    instead of uname
>>
>> It seems like there were no objections on the RFC, apart from maybe
>> changing the perf tests to run as a kself test. But that's probably not
>> going to happen for a while, if ever, and these fragments can always
>> be moved in that case.
> 
> I missed the RFC, sorry.  Could you please add a link for that?
> 
> Thanks,
> Namhyung

Yep, it's here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d02cce4a-47b1-a776-0d3a-a6a7c9a4d8fd@arm.com/T/

> 
> 
>>
>> James Clark (1):
>>   perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs
>>
>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README |  7 +++++++
>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64  |  1 +
>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config | 11 +++++++++++
>>  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config
>>
>>
>> base-commit: ad5f604e186ac08d12c401e34ea96c09c38ddbc5
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>

Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

[James Clark]

On 30/06/2023 09:04, James Clark wrote:
> 
> 
> On 29/06/2023 23:03, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> Hi James,
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:53 AM James Clark <james.clark@arm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Changes since RFC:
>>>
>>>  * Changed arch filename convention to use the ARCH= build time values
>>>    instead of uname
>>>
>>> It seems like there were no objections on the RFC, apart from maybe
>>> changing the perf tests to run as a kself test. But that's probably not
>>> going to happen for a while, if ever, and these fragments can always
>>> be moved in that case.
>>
>> I missed the RFC, sorry.  Could you please add a link for that?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Namhyung
> 
> Yep, it's here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d02cce4a-47b1-a776-0d3a-a6a7c9a4d8fd@arm.com/T/
> 

Hi Arnaldo,

Any interest in taking this one?

Thanks
James

>>
>>
>>>
>>> James Clark (1):
>>>   perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs
>>>
>>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README |  7 +++++++
>>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64  |  1 +
>>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config | 11 +++++++++++
>>>  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
>>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
>>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config
>>>
>>>
>>> base-commit: ad5f604e186ac08d12c401e34ea96c09c38ddbc5
>>> --
>>> 2.34.1
>>>

Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 11:48:34AM +0100, James Clark escreveu:
> 
> 
> On 30/06/2023 09:04, James Clark wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 29/06/2023 23:03, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> >> Hi James,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:53 AM James Clark <james.clark@arm.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Changes since RFC:
> >>>
> >>>  * Changed arch filename convention to use the ARCH= build time values
> >>>    instead of uname
> >>>
> >>> It seems like there were no objections on the RFC, apart from maybe
> >>> changing the perf tests to run as a kself test. But that's probably not
> >>> going to happen for a while, if ever, and these fragments can always
> >>> be moved in that case.
> >>
> >> I missed the RFC, sorry.  Could you please add a link for that?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Namhyung
> > 
> > Yep, it's here:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d02cce4a-47b1-a776-0d3a-a6a7c9a4d8fd@arm.com/T/
> > 
> 
> Hi Arnaldo,
> 
> Any interest in taking this one?

Yeah, looks useful, we can go on from this starting point and improve
it.

I merged it into perf-tools-next.

Thanks,

- Arnaldo
 
> Thanks
> James
> 
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> James Clark (1):
> >>>   perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs
> >>>
> >>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README |  7 +++++++
> >>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64  |  1 +
> >>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config | 11 +++++++++++
> >>>  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
> >>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
> >>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
> >>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> base-commit: ad5f604e186ac08d12c401e34ea96c09c38ddbc5
> >>> --
> >>> 2.34.1
> >>>

-- 

- Arnaldo

Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs

[James Clark]

On 28/07/2023 14:29, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 11:48:34AM +0100, James Clark escreveu:
>>
>>
>> On 30/06/2023 09:04, James Clark wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 29/06/2023 23:03, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>>> Hi James,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 3:53 AM James Clark <james.clark@arm.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Changes since RFC:
>>>>>
>>>>>  * Changed arch filename convention to use the ARCH= build time values
>>>>>    instead of uname
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems like there were no objections on the RFC, apart from maybe
>>>>> changing the perf tests to run as a kself test. But that's probably not
>>>>> going to happen for a while, if ever, and these fragments can always
>>>>> be moved in that case.
>>>>
>>>> I missed the RFC, sorry.  Could you please add a link for that?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Namhyung
>>>
>>> Yep, it's here:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d02cce4a-47b1-a776-0d3a-a6a7c9a4d8fd@arm.com/T/
>>>
>>
>> Hi Arnaldo,
>>
>> Any interest in taking this one?
> 
> Yeah, looks useful, we can go on from this starting point and improve
> it.
> 
> I merged it into perf-tools-next.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> - Arnaldo
>  

Thanks Arnaldo!

>> Thanks
>> James
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> James Clark (1):
>>>>>   perf tools: Add a place to put kernel config fragments for test runs
>>>>>
>>>>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README |  7 +++++++
>>>>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64  |  1 +
>>>>>  tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config | 11 +++++++++++
>>>>>  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>>>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/README
>>>>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/arm64
>>>>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/tests/config-fragments/config
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> base-commit: ad5f604e186ac08d12c401e34ea96c09c38ddbc5
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.34.1
>>>>>
>