lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] dmatest: masking tests for channel capabilities
From
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Dan Williams <djbw@fb.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Jubin Mehta <jubin.mehta@intel.com> wrote:
>
>>> Would you like to have some changes regarding the configuration
>>> process for the module parameters of the dmatest?
>>
>> Yes, as a first step I would like to see a clean up of the the
>> configuration parameters to be available via
>> /sys/module/dmatest/parameters rather than /sys/kernel/debug/dmatest
>
> Do you mean to enable write access to them?

Yes.

>
>> As for "run" and "results" I see Andy's point that those are a bit
>> awkward as parameters. However, we do have trace points as a more
>> general mechanism for dumping events and data to userspace. If we had
>> /sys/module/dmatest/parameters/run with a tracepoint for the result
>> line does that get us everything we need for automation? I can see
>> more tracepoints beng added to get some perf metrics out of the tests.
>
> I'm not familiar neither with perf, nor with tracepoints. Could you
> elaborate and show here the scheme how it should work? How we will get
> results? In what form?
>

It would be very similar to what it does now except using generic
functionality. At a high level you would have a tracepoint that emits
something like:

dma0chan0-copy0: #1: No errors with src_off=0x7bf dst_off=0x8ad len=0x3fea (0)

...and that message shows up in the ftrace buffer when it fires.

These articles are a good starting point.
https://lwn.net/Articles/379903/
https://lwn.net/Articles/383362/


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-06-18 23:01    [W:0.049 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site