From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794219759; b=siPxRitF5W5RzON3r8mDzxoNu00cVOL/80VSYUOftvsRXZ8obnGdV+BeS803wf2RzCzU fObOIx+bT4VkUuqAsdXzrISsZvR3ExVgei5VjI0roXksKi4fmPLEGbnBhTwe5yTrYf6ZQ GO4f6RxIB5jnpHOJNZgXmEbEJHhLPM2WeAVCvL3TZWFCaFrg5pjkDOdAdeGhGtQDbzz8V cshPudFnnxj24XVmMQdFmSdrz5RKw+X3i9AyuBKYN/97sOl+HIzFXxgnq7n2HiJyHDCMA /BZjs3NiQQbt5iYg6FRNPKnHEuUhCoaPvyuk1QxrMSIDl7T0oOMNziDm25i2vKRnZag== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794219759; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date; bh=XsDhRqZASdPoTGZKLIWYTnvuBjs1FVioaWeC9S3f0Yg=; b=jeVMNNdH602E71nyrsY0UVF7z2xkDuKmURZkgDZTCDY7SjxJ4cZlKAxbSjShPShkG/bd 1mj0zSsX4m5V5QlnF9huiHWcpUfXxyz9sGgpKv6CD2cOCYI8jAFvyzxl31LJYPXXApl+0 w4w9olPd6YUhqegy5l879vPfbiOoSqKf5UbezUM6OAD0WNZ4gVgubrs/tXsx1Ysmq5Edr pXhiKKah4dnM9IOIZaeAxNtt/DzbVg+Cq8V4xkQDf3CDS3rbJh+3VChz9SVpAfRMhLlP6 3/tP6/McD5t5EjQhSFpioZyCtd7miLUeoEsjwXw1ZJfIRKPrUqN0GLpMnF3oo/r64fw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=d0xBAzNU; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A65EE606A31C for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2026 10:22:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=d0xBAzNU Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6436A1F0089F; Mon, 9 Nov 2026 10:22:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1794219758; bh=XsDhRqZASdPoTGZKLIWYTnvuBjs1FVioaWeC9S3f0Yg=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=d0xBAzNUj0DeEhRHsHK6oXYhGkM3YxbWTx39YLSXygEmTNkwOCnDvW9DEtOEwanwT MUiYjleBQcGMFixguuGbGaqp0O5cbV09AFv2gHtJZel+v6q8qiL+E8eXxT8nrms4fZ B6aJMBBgDS2liPJYDXPxzrP9uxepKl8Efw0dPwieYr6sCRVNqVx0V89cQ74zNabVUe VZaI3y6sERUn0PF5CIa2yvrvDj21SqNJu2HaDxvxax32ZXp0aq4mE2WpLpqvu6JorL Q/xn6AsqJoZWtJwHhFy+yijsTbWioelpKlLMqJXkor6kInwHiN/xA34Jo1IRX3nggT dnwXozFl2b8+Q== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] perf test: Don't starve per-process tests with system-wide events Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "James Clark" Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261109-james-perf-test-fixes-v3-4-e8d0a65e618a@linaro.org> References: <20261109-james-perf-test-fixes-v3-0-e8d0a65e618a@linaro.org> <20261109-james-perf-test-fixes-v3-4-e8d0a65e618a@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2026 10:22:38 +0000 X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list > Some tests intermittently fail when run in parallel, for example "Check > branch stack sampling" fails with no branches recorded at all. >=20 > The default event is cycles:P which there may only be 1 or 2 HW counters > for on Intel because it's precise. System wide or per-core precise > events hog the HW counter leaving other per-process tests with no > samples. Rather than make all the tests that use default record commands > run serially, just make the system wide ones use a software event which > has the greatest possible compatibility. They don't need precise > sampling or HW counters anyway. The per-process tests can be left alone > as their events/processes never run concurrently on any one core. >=20 > The LBR filter is another resource shared by all events on a CPU, and > the system-wide LBR test uses different filters to the per-process > branch stack test, so mark the LBR test as exclusive. > [ ... ] > ... > ---- end(-1) ---- > 138: Check branch stack sampling : FAILED! >=20 > Signed-off-by: James Clark Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261109-james-perf= -test-fixes-v3-0-e8d0a65e618a@linaro.org?part=3D4