[PATCH V2] tools/perf/tests/base_probe: Fix check for the count of existing probes in test_adding_kernel

[PATCH V2] tools/perf/tests/base_probe: Fix check for the count of existing probes in test_adding_kernel

[Athira Rajeev]

perftool-testsuite_probe fails in test_adding_kernel as below:
	Regexp not found: "probe:inode_permission_11"
	-- [ FAIL ] -- perf_probe :: test_adding_kernel :: force-adding probes ::
	second probe adding (with force) (output regexp parsing)
	event syntax error: 'probe:inode_permission_11'
	  \___ unknown tracepoint

	Error:  File /sys/kernel/tracing//events/probe/inode_permission_11
	not found.
	Hint:   Perhaps this kernel misses some CONFIG_ setting to
	enable this feature?.

The test does the following:
1) Adds a probe point first using :
    $CMD_PERF probe --add $TEST_PROBE
2) Then tries to add same probe again without —force
and expects it to fail. Next tries to add same probe again
with —force. In this case, perf probe succeeds and adds
the probe with a suffix number. Example:

 ./perf probe --add inode_permission
 Added new event:
  probe:inode_permission (on inode_permission)

 ./perf probe --add inode_permission --force
 Added new event:
  probe:inode_permission_1 (on inode_permission)

  ./perf probe --add inode_permission --force
 Added new event:
  probe:inode_permission_2 (on inode_permission)

Each time, suffix is added to existing probe name.
To get the suffix number, test cases uses :
NO_OF_PROBES=`$CMD_PERF probe -l | wc -l`

This will work if there is no other probe existing
in the system. If there are any other probes other than
kernel probes or inode_permission, ( example: any probe),
"perf probe -l" will include count for other probes too.

Example, in the system where this failed, already some
probes were default added. So count became 10
  ./perf probe -l | wc -l
  10

So to be specific for "inode_permission", restrict the
probe count check to that probe point alone using :
NO_OF_PROBES=`$CMD_PERF probe -l $TEST_PROBE| wc -l`

Similarly while removing the probe using "probe --del *",
( removing all probes ), check uses:

 ../common/check_all_lines_matched.pl "Removed event: probe:$TEST_PROBE"

But if there are other probes in the system, the log will
contain reference to other existing probe too. Hence change
usage of check_all_lines_matched.pl to check_all_patterns_found.pl
This will make sure expecting string comes in the result

Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
Changelog:
 v1 -> v2:
 No code changes. After being reviewed by Michael Petlan, since
 initial patch was posted in 2024-10-14, rebased on top of latest
 perf-tools-next

 tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh b/tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh
index d541ffd44a93..f8b5f096d0d7 100755
--- a/tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh
@@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ print_results $PERF_EXIT_CODE $CHECK_EXIT_CODE "force-adding probes :: second pr
 (( TEST_RESULT += $? ))
 
 # adding existing probe with '--force' should pass
-NO_OF_PROBES=`$CMD_PERF probe -l | wc -l`
+NO_OF_PROBES=`$CMD_PERF probe -l $TEST_PROBE| wc -l`
 $CMD_PERF probe --force --add $TEST_PROBE 2> $LOGS_DIR/adding_kernel_forceadd_03.err
 PERF_EXIT_CODE=$?
 
@@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ print_results $PERF_EXIT_CODE $CHECK_EXIT_CODE "using doubled probe"
 $CMD_PERF probe --del \* 2> $LOGS_DIR/adding_kernel_removing_wildcard.err
 PERF_EXIT_CODE=$?
 
-../common/check_all_lines_matched.pl "Removed event: probe:$TEST_PROBE" "Removed event: probe:${TEST_PROBE}_1" < $LOGS_DIR/adding_kernel_removing_wildcard.err
+../common/check_all_patterns_found.pl "Removed event: probe:$TEST_PROBE" "Removed event: probe:${TEST_PROBE}_1" < $LOGS_DIR/adding_kernel_removing_wildcard.err
 CHECK_EXIT_CODE=$?
 
 print_results $PERF_EXIT_CODE $CHECK_EXIT_CODE "removing multiple probes"
-- 
2.43.5

Re: [PATCH V2] tools/perf/tests/base_probe: Fix check for the count of existing probes in test_adding_kernel

[Veronika Molnarova]

On 1/10/25 10:43, Athira Rajeev wrote:
> perftool-testsuite_probe fails in test_adding_kernel as below:
> 	Regexp not found: "probe:inode_permission_11"
> 	-- [ FAIL ] -- perf_probe :: test_adding_kernel :: force-adding probes ::
> 	second probe adding (with force) (output regexp parsing)
> 	event syntax error: 'probe:inode_permission_11'
> 	  \___ unknown tracepoint
> 
> 	Error:  File /sys/kernel/tracing//events/probe/inode_permission_11
> 	not found.
> 	Hint:   Perhaps this kernel misses some CONFIG_ setting to
> 	enable this feature?.
> 
> The test does the following:
> 1) Adds a probe point first using :
>     $CMD_PERF probe --add $TEST_PROBE
> 2) Then tries to add same probe again without —force
> and expects it to fail. Next tries to add same probe again
> with —force. In this case, perf probe succeeds and adds
> the probe with a suffix number. Example:
> 
>  ./perf probe --add inode_permission
>  Added new event:
>   probe:inode_permission (on inode_permission)
> 
>  ./perf probe --add inode_permission --force
>  Added new event:
>   probe:inode_permission_1 (on inode_permission)
> 
>   ./perf probe --add inode_permission --force
>  Added new event:
>   probe:inode_permission_2 (on inode_permission)
> 
> Each time, suffix is added to existing probe name.
> To get the suffix number, test cases uses :
> NO_OF_PROBES=`$CMD_PERF probe -l | wc -l`
> 
> This will work if there is no other probe existing
> in the system. If there are any other probes other than
> kernel probes or inode_permission, ( example: any probe),
> "perf probe -l" will include count for other probes too.
> 
> Example, in the system where this failed, already some
> probes were default added. So count became 10
>   ./perf probe -l | wc -l
>   10
> 
> So to be specific for "inode_permission", restrict the
> probe count check to that probe point alone using :
> NO_OF_PROBES=`$CMD_PERF probe -l $TEST_PROBE| wc -l`
> 
> Similarly while removing the probe using "probe --del *",
> ( removing all probes ), check uses:
> 
>  ../common/check_all_lines_matched.pl "Removed event: probe:$TEST_PROBE"
> 
> But if there are other probes in the system, the log will
> contain reference to other existing probe too. Hence change
> usage of check_all_lines_matched.pl to check_all_patterns_found.pl
> This will make sure expecting string comes in the result
> 
> Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Acked-by: Veronika Molnarova <vmolnaro@redhat.com>

Thanks,
Veronika

> ---
> Changelog:
>  v1 -> v2:
>  No code changes. After being reviewed by Michael Petlan, since
>  initial patch was posted in 2024-10-14, rebased on top of latest
>  perf-tools-next
> 
>  tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh b/tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh
> index d541ffd44a93..f8b5f096d0d7 100755
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/shell/base_probe/test_adding_kernel.sh
> @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ print_results $PERF_EXIT_CODE $CHECK_EXIT_CODE "force-adding probes :: second pr
>  (( TEST_RESULT += $? ))
>  
>  # adding existing probe with '--force' should pass
> -NO_OF_PROBES=`$CMD_PERF probe -l | wc -l`
> +NO_OF_PROBES=`$CMD_PERF probe -l $TEST_PROBE| wc -l`
>  $CMD_PERF probe --force --add $TEST_PROBE 2> $LOGS_DIR/adding_kernel_forceadd_03.err
>  PERF_EXIT_CODE=$?
>  
> @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ print_results $PERF_EXIT_CODE $CHECK_EXIT_CODE "using doubled probe"
>  $CMD_PERF probe --del \* 2> $LOGS_DIR/adding_kernel_removing_wildcard.err
>  PERF_EXIT_CODE=$?
>  
> -../common/check_all_lines_matched.pl "Removed event: probe:$TEST_PROBE" "Removed event: probe:${TEST_PROBE}_1" < $LOGS_DIR/adding_kernel_removing_wildcard.err
> +../common/check_all_patterns_found.pl "Removed event: probe:$TEST_PROBE" "Removed event: probe:${TEST_PROBE}_1" < $LOGS_DIR/adding_kernel_removing_wildcard.err
>  CHECK_EXIT_CODE=$?
>  
>  print_results $PERF_EXIT_CODE $CHECK_EXIT_CODE "removing multiple probes"

Re: [PATCH V2] tools/perf/tests/base_probe: Fix check for the count of existing probes in test_adding_kernel

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 11:21:24AM +0100, Veronika Molnarova wrote:
> On 1/10/25 10:43, Athira Rajeev wrote:
> > But if there are other probes in the system, the log will
> > contain reference to other existing probe too. Hence change
> > usage of check_all_lines_matched.pl to check_all_patterns_found.pl
> > This will make sure expecting string comes in the result
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Veronika Molnarova <vmolnaro@redhat.com>

Thanks, applied to perf-tools-next,

- Arnaldo

Re: [PATCH V2] tools/perf/tests/base_probe: Fix check for the count of existing probes in test_adding_kernel

[Athira Rajeev]

> On 13 Jan 2025, at 8:36 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 11:21:24AM +0100, Veronika Molnarova wrote:
>> On 1/10/25 10:43, Athira Rajeev wrote:
>>> But if there are other probes in the system, the log will
>>> contain reference to other existing probe too. Hence change
>>> usage of check_all_lines_matched.pl to check_all_patterns_found.pl
>>> This will make sure expecting string comes in the result
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> 
>> Acked-by: Veronika Molnarova <vmolnaro@redhat.com>
> 
> Thanks, applied to perf-tools-next,
> 
> - Arnaldo
Thanks Veronika for the ack and thanks Arnaldo for pulling in the patch

Thanks
Athira