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=1794232625; b=Umozocw+Bsh86JMsN0IDnKJMCatxzOnjcwQTSShqHy5gQUHpZ5lBTsB7TxhJsO7tYWaE DPzvsSPk7K+diqvhFX/OXEsKNCinuIa+UoYVHcF07lKEbf4osvP41elxMKPfR5LQEkP0D h8PmDS9OISvix3GNFE3JsFjaRfLfjsyYkCuAmfqDLRK15h6R8WkXNgxeqQYzbT6Zl60Oc UIu//MH40BjnpV3rrmdJp9LlF8EuPVfRpS3tbBr9CU1c5zOggU8tgmu1N9TTEfKuhFk3j TGyQY8LkUtkrnOdOLPxUXPyjDLRNtpuIEH8ce+tZ9AwDYNxod8T7I4ZHeRywSai8U0g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794232625; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date; bh=S2G+DSPYLFOn55xqv3gA8EmdNOpqxA15xP8usem+OBw=; b=hvgYN68o36kDU6tD0zGRy/t+UwlYu0hAcA2uQaFAu0kdSTYPhm778d8MTPa5kXSLDhOp QTAOkf6D/vKNsfczvvsFj6G0dSVS2L/bCOVCMd5Y0bd5PVdXBwb/n43yCiqeb2nBAbG1Q oP+keI3kfpqqXvh7zW5yEXCoSV1oo6hsl2oPyRUIpopnFHepghYPr/IWe5bbK9Jv16XoB /T97gc/CcwzqRO8n9nv+8v1XaJtpO9Fev3V7IZs3CBb2TUX14Aq/hGG6fkPoDXiI8YFii ouG8hKpq6agx59wkRDaqSWmtxfSw947p1tu9JwnsSYx6SYguk863OxR5SWSjcecbSzg== 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=M3CRXJ3Y; 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 3F0BF606A322 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2026 13:57:04 +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=M3CRXJ3Y Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AB0A81F008A1; Mon, 9 Nov 2026 13:57:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1794232624; bh=S2G+DSPYLFOn55xqv3gA8EmdNOpqxA15xP8usem+OBw=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=M3CRXJ3YtM35o7tXQgtSfokzsCYhPpgZz1bj7Fsyr2hYdrbV1af91BJqgQOP6BTS4 hdxOk4Su7tMcclTyb2nnKXApnktBuoNWu4vdPfWx8qfOrFnfoIEoeMcArVtGF2a+bU fYciWlgr+i/7m0PH8K86qC6P6/EUO8CumpgqhaZKCOg9WdT1lGDTnXz58tdHb1f4Nq NGBtmxlZ3veEURNbp7vmKzSobdcFquyDJrjcq3C1IKm/brCzYysHl7IeZbOyBJ3MyK t2pRW11qsu4XzaIS2FG1R36mDpw5S3Q/UER5R3KJu8oY41EVhkMgQMxl2aXQZ3CX/3 vYExMmjj8HDRw== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 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-v4-4-355ee6b81917@linaro.org> References: <20261109-james-perf-test-fixes-v4-0-355ee6b81917@linaro.org> <20261109-james-perf-test-fixes-v4-4-355ee6b81917@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2026 13:57:04 +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-v4-0-355ee6b81917@linaro.org?part=3D4