From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 BEB841A83F9; Mon, 19 May 2025 18:29:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747679342; cv=none; b=JHywRWkPMn6/Gx3Ms1c0ZGVdyezGVhTg7TwT2LDnFEakUK17bzrHZI2pSu1nXXBmxyWL2zL1mdpsDwh8DN8wlmivuHQamBAlQZjpnNY4437s2jDw/GhOZmh6cLrohKnpZDGb7BPrSWaO8MaAkX3N/hzJiJvHHSeNXrKcAZphM60= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747679342; c=relaxed/simple; bh=G8Gkl9lnzHDZwnlb37+AG+qtzTbZ34508kakmBdG10I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=afozza/59R0qxsk5EGxGCPbSKZ3eviXUmZWXNrSui9V3ORqaBOJ056XgFLEO73HScVtNFDMtTnGOIToihWx55TulrRrzo4vv6ZjlG49Xdv9VDuRxRF4GNHak3YtFB51TFTJikXNmJH6mWgMSc3EL3hJDnH5kB2oP2wvqWu9HhW4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=BAYO5AR8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="BAYO5AR8" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 12E35C4CEE4; Mon, 19 May 2025 18:29:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1747679342; bh=G8Gkl9lnzHDZwnlb37+AG+qtzTbZ34508kakmBdG10I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=BAYO5AR8cUFaZbDmJiCLuRL55GNYvrWCo3e803T+m3fbVbClsgzEzlDtsF+f64yPm mna8L2ZtTCBIEU7otOmLEwWSldWFOOudHYzXj87D3j8LktiZRtDv450ATd5nV9MmP7 OZ3GI1VKf+LiFU/6YSydcc85wHBr3frMzlJBe/tbUTRu33vrbORpD52GV6cVJK/sgP wcb7KY/nvtOxzF/Bgr04F95rq5b1U1rl/iXRUYDILK665vKYtyzJesy9sWGQEgm+9h 5OKmaXMuj+tOvkShFFryO0BeuC63gEqa6eWXdtJNkwEYPll6+XJkgVISSftJ+e8JKf yr2W85cBTm06A== Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 15:28:58 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Namhyung Kim Cc: Ravi Bangoria , Adrian Hunter , Ian Rogers , James Clark , Jiri Olsa , Kan Liang , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: IBS perf test failures on 9950x3d Message-ID: References: <33e86415-c90d-420a-b7a8-6a360769aea4@amd.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Sun, May 18, 2025 at 11:22:24AM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote: > On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 05:33:19PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria wrote: > > Hi Arnaldo, > > > If it needs a specific kernel, then the test needs to cope with that, > > > etc. > > 1) Bunch of IBS kernel fixes went in recently (v6.15-rc1): > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250115054438.1021-1-ravi.bangoria@amd.com > > Since you are running on 6.14.5-300.fc42.x86_64, the failures are > > genuine and indicating that kernel should be fixed. Telling that to the user and possibly skipping the test if viable using uname to get the version and if less than v6.15-rc1 print "Skip (needs v6.15-rc1 or newer)" may be an option. Then if the bug somehow reappears, people running 'perf test' will flag it. > > I'm wondering how would the test cope with the buggy kernel. Or > > probably 'perf test' a wrong place to put such selftests? > Maybe... some kernel internal changes can be tested in the selftest. > And 'perf test' should work with any kernel versions. Is the test > checking any invalid configs? Probably then it should move to the > selftest so that it can be tied to the fixed kernels and 'perf test' > should only use valid configs. Right, but then there are cases where something changed and then 'perf test' should adapt to accept new behaviour while keeping what made sense for older kernels. The fix Leo sent recently is one such case. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250519082755.1669187-1-leo.yan@arm.com/T/#u And I think having it in 'perf test' as well may make the feature to be tested more widely, both by those who run selftests as well as by people trying just 'perf test'. - Arnaldo