Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:42:47 -0300 | From | Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <> | Subject | Re: perf tool: About tests debug level |
| |
Em Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 09:00:31AM -0700, Ian Rogers escreveu: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 4:58 AM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > On 22/06/2021 06:04, Ian Rogers wrote: > > >> ---- end ---- > > >> Parse and process metrics: FAILED! > > >> > > >> Note that the "FAILED" messages from the test code come from pr_debug(). > > >> > > >> In a way, I feel that pr_debug()/err from the test is more important > > >> than pr_debug() from the core code (when running a test). > > >> > > >> Any opinion on this or how to improve (if anyone agrees with me)? Or am > > >> I missing something? Or is it not so important? > > > Hi John, > > > > > > > Hi Ian, > > > > > I think the issue is that in the parsing you don't know it's broken > > > until something goes wrong. Putting everything on pr_err would cause > > > spam in the not broken case. > > > > Right, I would not suggest using pr_err everywhere. > > > > > Improving the parsing error handling is a > > > big task with lex and yacc to some extent getting in the way. Perhaps > > > a middle way is to have a parameter to the parser that logs more, and > > > recursively call this in the parser when parsing fails. I guess there > > > is also a danger of a performance hit. > > > > So I am thinking that for running a test, -v means different levels logs > > for test code and for core (non-test code). For example, -v prints > > pr_warn() and higher for test logs, but nothing for core logs. And then > > -vv for running a test gives pr_debug and above for test logs, and > > pr_warn and above for core logs. Or something like that. > > > > Maybe that is not a good idea. But I'm just saying that it's hard to > > debug currently at -v for tests. > > > > Thanks, > > John > > I think this sounds good. It'd be nice also to have verbose output in > the shell tests following the same convention. There's currently no > verbose logging in shell tests but I propose it here: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210621215648.2991319-1-irogers@google.com/ > By their nature some of the shell tests launch perf, perhaps there can > be some convention on passing the verbose flag through in those cases.
Hey, there is even a v2 for that one, lemme process it :-)
- Arnaldo
| |