From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D168B1F3FD0; Tue, 13 May 2025 20:43:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747169019; cv=none; b=bnsSEJY6EL2l3YpJUHEvCr5bmvZtcr6O+L7A7i1XQ4iW6qYBtO0woFd+oVGEOrcSZDalsQRgq3VcMPT3MFBpG+XhNFobpkGNwdQTEi/lWVDYYPDWxVaZkRtdDuly0QCnjbaDqUZjElBj32NaOvgFRyxqTwjCSm0tHLeE6n2/A/4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747169019; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DlzoO2fu8n/uCk0v+sIlLnDoi+5ozdMq6NjBF4QfH1Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YtB32K8PjWYN///dyo2cZsWee5C2cq417lKhKOyeE3OSR5ElYKyF6B+ZakBpwgj7p9ptN0F/02E552IvpC6xrpxMV31DiVMQBYw3ctVrY+rkB/eMgaZoVEOF9/oq9HcvvRFVcVofsqYljq7/3fedYAzQavAPzEa5Yc+CeC7uc2k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=AMVckfZB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="AMVckfZB" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE053C4CEE4; Tue, 13 May 2025 20:43:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1747169019; bh=DlzoO2fu8n/uCk0v+sIlLnDoi+5ozdMq6NjBF4QfH1Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=AMVckfZB1GImH8ldE/nI0p4bsH+Li/T8YfxZ8tGNw+iZrFpVEo5L83N+gosebCwZy vZK7AJt/fK+w4af7Bu0ho/WkWpW5bouupmG8oPNjEbVz+XS48Z1VQxm4LxElMK/K3U B83QtuQ5fLOuRBtfmZLVJgNfhPnacCBv/9DW8RYeSaKxs4Apiy6ey0XyDc56sYfTlN HxikQju+Yd31QOjyHiL6192f9l9zZsKpI3hkj3Jeok17wNd9/0rZ/kCnKS6EQbmPox JNduMBTvtJ4geQmGn+3IGDrKmy6Qsuq66iMny5b0+mWQgbOOEvJA7kM5zfAvVdruVh uhbBi7FEFvTew== Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 17:43:36 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: James Clark Cc: Harshit Mogalapalli , Namhyung Kim , Adrian Hunter , Ian Rogers , Jiri Olsa , Kan Liang , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: make -C tools/perf build-test failing on aarch64 Message-ID: References: <95bd54bf-09b7-4444-94a7-87ab9a3035e6@linaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 11:05:16AM +0100, James Clark wrote: > On 11/05/2025 18:46, James Clark wrote: > > On 10/05/2025 2:42 am, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > >     I noticed that upstream is failing on aarch64: > > > I think this is related to: > > > commit bfb713ea53c746b07ae69fe97fa9b5388e4f34f9 (perf-tools) > > > Author: James Clark > > > Date:   Thu Apr 17 14:55:50 2025 +0100 > > >      perf tools: Fix arm64 build by generating unistd_64.h > > > Can you please take a look? > > Hmm yeah looks like it's caused by that. I'm travelling tomorrow but > > I'll try to take a look. > Sent the fix, hopefully 3rd time lucky. Thanks a bunch! It seems we will not need a 4th. :-) > I know there is the build-test target but I had let my setup bitrot so I > wasn't running it. I don't know if you have ever shared any of your docker > containers that you use for build testing? I keep them at: https://github.com/acmel/linux-tools-container-builds The README should be enough to get you going, if you find some difficulty, please lemme know. I use this since forever and made them available at github when Daniel Bristot started maintaining his tools in the kernels sources, the idea was for him to also use to test build his tools. It'll be great if you find them useful and, better, wire it up to some sort of CI you're using. It does a subset of what 'make -C tools/perf build-test' does, but the idea for them is to switch to do the full build-test target and also to run 'perf test', that would be restricted to whatever perms a the containers are given. Nowadays with parallel 'perf test' and it having being polished to work with less perms, that seems like a worthy goal to pursue. > I will also try to get that target added to our CI. We're only running a > normal build and then "perf test" there. That will be really nice of you, wiring up these things so that when I run it all goes as expected will be great! - Arnaldo