From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE02CC77B72 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 18:35:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229898AbjDTSfK (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2023 14:35:10 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46384 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229599AbjDTSfI (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Apr 2023 14:35:08 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8371D524B for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 11:34:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECCDD64B31 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 18:33:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28153C433EF; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 18:33:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1682015593; bh=xQM+kO6WzR87nsdtVYHF5RzYM99P3AAbto6Xn+55Cso=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=k2UNPLHud3Ws0VXopWc5Odx+SHCHFnK/OT3OllLca95IvNweo+ofD4/FBDSk2SxIK yK5Q6TM8E4t1q+vINIIbRnsu9cDCujFFWjPwnNqFOroN22Qp6vDvOTavG5PtJdQAOn HKboagGIVHA1FsTP2NfXx5ZYBaHV87RKsiP2ma2q3ZatNWPSQeY6T0/vP4WE4nijaN 7tuHoi3ZUoPbDlFR2DMwb20xrBHCefdDOwG5htQWYerHHAl1xzYPCrOHarCBvdnJ4C 2WnHTrrwryJTjJzuSSIHvLyQndKnP3Qlt+2itBSIu9tAgrwrc20d6DTp5CjulZ2dEP zzL4EQmCoI86w== Received: by quaco.ghostprotocols.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A17D5403B5; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 15:33:10 -0300 (-03) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 15:33:10 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: James Clark Cc: Suzuki K Poulose , Ganapatrao Kulkarni , mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, darren@os.amperecomputing.com, scott@os.amperecomputing.com, scclevenger@os.amperecomputing.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, coresight@lists.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, mike.leach@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf cs-etm: Add support for coresight trace for any range of CPUs Message-ID: References: <20230419172101.78638-1-gankulkarni@os.amperecomputing.com> <84eb3363-2ef8-d3f1-4613-805959dbf334@os.amperecomputing.com> <91ba66e7-737f-6526-a703-a755e114f9d4@arm.com> <902dea0e-456b-d763-fdb5-a520ea3d7536@arm.com> <53132776-c998-a24f-a811-d8fb2e5e6535@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53132776-c998-a24f-a811-d8fb2e5e6535@arm.com> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Em Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 04:44:21PM +0100, James Clark escreveu: > On 20/04/2023 14:03, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > > On 20/04/2023 13:37, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote: > >> On 20-04-2023 06:00 pm, James Clark wrote: > >>> On 20/04/2023 12:47, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote: > >>>> My patch is rebased on 6.3-RC7 codebase with Mike's 3 perf patches > >>>> related to dynamic id [1] support(queued for 6.4). > >>>> "perf report -D" works for me. > >>> I was referring to sparse CPU lists, which I think you mentioned above > >>> doesn't work even with this patch. > >>>> [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-perf-users/msg27452.html > >>> It should be based on the next branch here: > >>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/coresight/linux.git > >> OK. > > It need not be. Since this patch is purely perf tools patch and has > > nothing to do with the kernel drivers, it should be beased on whatever > > the tip of the perf tool tree is. Otherwise we risk rebasing to that > > eventually. > Good point, sorry for the confusion! > I wonder if we could have some kind of new staging branch that has both > up to date perf and coresight changes at the same time? Either that > would make things like this easier, or more complicated. I'm not sure. > I suppose I can DIY it quite easily but then everyone would have to as well. My two cents: It this was available together with a CI that would run 'perf test' + 'make -C tools/perf build-test' and any other set of tests, that would be great. But not having it also has an advantage: no lockstep development, tooling should gracefully work with whatever is available. I say this because it is a really common theme, even Debian had a packaging scheme that shoehorned (forcefully fused?) perf's and the kernel's version :-\ - Arnaldo