From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.9]) (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 94CD518A6B5; Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:04:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734944682; cv=none; b=TFY+74F45NMqWjdls9mImq+W9yi36MlBhFRWvkFHsiW9Wkh/FFgcRxbG5xipFgtV6YCMFCWpByZ9LyCNTkY5iLJMVgaLuvbXfagXEQnvksmLfuAgJ+BEiEavoQXhCHD3WC3bNmRM0MRVRQo4Vitn7g/LwHCr/MnwXB6og3sHBQA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734944682; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qDbsIV88b/IbUTi8Tebj4V3sLqa8RIcuToSG7703uus=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=GypUOqjUyGjVWI0td5rKz4zfIVaiiB1BaxC6ILqFSs8rNSL4BoXnNJkNn0C4ypuyaPbrjKz6wtSzZIFgbxBJWzYvgk++zU6YmFaZnEqphvcFafzV/ST5m+dbGvZtkRNMu/LBM4H50T75Ye1zhSB6vlhum6x+X2iq6MpsqST5seE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=F94eL4UX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="F94eL4UX" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1734944680; x=1766480680; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qDbsIV88b/IbUTi8Tebj4V3sLqa8RIcuToSG7703uus=; b=F94eL4UXYa4l2U5qjLMx5xBQGMF3hyUYmmaK9hs2XGcP8QOxgW04rXqp I8e+QNc5LFeX0ETz5jSWn3HJDLqc2R4ZkdY42Hnlxx1kn5GEyu8wWEffJ 38pFckieM//7cWTsHX+6RAsdxSjm4MrchDOaxlGe8Uiva4TBCETQoMmdy 0DNtbMttQSGcY5ymYj/jSrRI4gpPYG4niaPhGuqEGc4R0vwix3yzRkoY1 Fs24ihddPSHKisRhK6kh5TfpPuNsZVAS2MJhLcaPAPiU40J98EHNV2UPc r5sy943F6FlmY+gG40C6cpFI5OZKIKrZ6p87DrzLVOnIMES/3MHG+tPLp Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: S6wbN0GUS4WiviscWGSB4A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: yQtA3vttR8qXyQ3SeK/BHg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11294"; a="46097651" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,256,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="46097651" Received: from fmviesa005.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.145]) by fmvoesa103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Dec 2024 01:04:40 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: /ky/PTxrSh283ciuKWu1jw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: fj79NWw/TwOVifKAiyWCkQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,224,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="103768650" Received: from dapengmi-mobl1.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.124.245.128]) ([10.124.245.128]) by fmviesa005-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Dec 2024 01:04:36 -0800 Message-ID: <8a89ba95-22cb-4e69-a776-3c927e80f5df@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 17:04:34 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tests: Make leader sampling test work without branch event To: Ian Rogers , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , "Liang, Kan" , James Clark Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Namhyung Kim , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Adrian Hunter , Veronika Molnarova , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20241115161600.228994-1-james.clark@linaro.org> Content-Language: en-US From: "Mi, Dapeng" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 12/21/2024 3:08 PM, Ian Rogers wrote: > On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 11:28 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 10:54:43AM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 8:16 AM James Clark wrote: >>>> Arm a57 only has speculative branch events so this test fails there. The >>>> test doesn't depend on branch instructions so change it to instructions >>>> which is pretty much guaranteed to be everywhere. The >>>> test_branch_counter() test above already tests for the existence of the >>>> branches event and skips if its not present. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: James Clark >>> Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers >> Thanks, applied to perf-tools-next, > Rebasing on perf-tools-next I see this failing on my Intel Tigerlake > laptop. An example script output for: > ``` > perf record -o "${perfdata}" -e "{instructions,instructions}:Su" > ``` > is: > ``` > perf 352917 49604.160314: 3 instructions: > 7f155caca323 [unknown] > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.160314: 3 instructions: > 7f155caca323 [unknown] > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.160317: 18 instructions: > 7f155cacaf3d _dl_start+0x3d > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.160317: 18 instructions: > 7f155cacaf3d _dl_start+0x3d > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.160319: 3 instructions: > 7f155cacaf44 _dl_start+0x44 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.160319: 3 instructions: > 7f155cacaf44 _dl_start+0x44 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.161099: 120 instructions: > ffffffff8ce00080 [unknown] ([unknown]) > perf 352917 49604.161099: 181013 instructions: > ffffffff8ce00080 [unknown] ([unknown]) > perf 352917 49604.161115: 8811 instructions: > 7f155cad22d0 strcmp+0x8b0 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.161115: 8811 instructions: > 7f155cad22d0 strcmp+0x8b0 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.161130: 10483 instructions: > 7f155caba508 _dl_new_object+0x198 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.161130: 10483 instructions: > 7f155caba508 _dl_new_object+0x198 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.165156: 177355 instructions: > 7f155cab90a4 _dl_lookup_symbol_x+0x44 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > perf 352917 49604.165156: 13313598 instructions: > 7f155cab90a4 _dl_lookup_symbol_x+0x44 > (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2) > ... > ``` > > Dapeng/Kan, any thoughts why the counts don't match for instructions > but did for branches? That looks strange,  what's your kernel version and perf-tool version? I just tried the latest perf-tools-next branch, but I don't see this issue. > > Thanks, > Ian