Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Nov 2022 11:14:05 +0000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 10/12] perf test: Replace brstack test workload | From | James Clark <> |
| |
On 10/11/2022 19:20, German Gomez wrote: > Hi Namhyung, thanks for doing the refactor, it looks a lot cleaner > > On 10/11/2022 18:19, Namhyung Kim wrote: >> So that it can get rid of requirement of a compiler. Also rename the >> symbols to match with the perf test workload. >> >> Cc: German Gomez <german.gomez@arm.com> >> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> >> --- >> tools/perf/tests/shell/test_brstack.sh | 66 +++++--------------------- >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/shell/test_brstack.sh b/tools/perf/tests/shell/test_brstack.sh >> index ec801cffae6b..a8a182dea25f 100755 >> --- a/tools/perf/tests/shell/test_brstack.sh >> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/shell/test_brstack.sh >> @@ -4,18 +4,12 @@ >> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >> # German Gomez <german.gomez@arm.com>, 2022 >> >> -# we need a C compiler to build the test programs >> -# so bail if none is found >> -if ! [ -x "$(command -v cc)" ]; then >> - echo "failed: no compiler, install gcc" >> - exit 2 >> -fi >> - >> # skip the test if the hardware doesn't support branch stack sampling >> # and if the architecture doesn't support filter types: any,save_type,u >> perf record -b -o- -B --branch-filter any,save_type,u true > /dev/null 2>&1 || exit 2 >> >> TMPDIR=$(mktemp -d /tmp/__perf_test.program.XXXXX) >> +TESTPROG="perf test -w brstack" >> >> cleanup() { >> rm -rf $TMPDIR >> @@ -23,57 +17,24 @@ cleanup() { >> >> trap cleanup exit term int >> >> -gen_test_program() { >> - # generate test program >> - cat << EOF > $1 >> -#define BENCH_RUNS 999999 >> -int cnt; >> -void bar(void) { >> -} /* return */ >> -void foo(void) { >> - bar(); /* call */ >> -} /* return */ >> -void bench(void) { >> - void (*foo_ind)(void) = foo; >> - if ((cnt++) % 3) /* branch (cond) */ >> - foo(); /* call */ >> - bar(); /* call */ >> - foo_ind(); /* call (ind) */ >> -} >> -int main(void) >> -{ >> - int cnt = 0; >> - while (1) { >> - if ((cnt++) > BENCH_RUNS) >> - break; >> - bench(); /* call */ >> - } /* branch (uncond) */ >> - return 0; >> -} >> -EOF >> -} >> - >> test_user_branches() { >> echo "Testing user branch stack sampling" >> >> - gen_test_program "$TEMPDIR/program.c" >> - cc -fno-inline -g "$TEMPDIR/program.c" -o $TMPDIR/a.out >> - >> - perf record -o $TMPDIR/perf.data --branch-filter any,save_type,u -- $TMPDIR/a.out > /dev/null 2>&1 >> + perf record -o $TMPDIR/perf.data --branch-filter any,save_type,u -- ${TESTPROG} > /dev/null 2>&1 >> perf script -i $TMPDIR/perf.data --fields brstacksym | xargs -n1 > $TMPDIR/perf.script >> >> # example of branch entries: >> - # foo+0x14/bar+0x40/P/-/-/0/CALL >> + # brstack_foo+0x14/brstack_bar+0x40/P/-/-/0/CALL >> >> set -x >> - egrep -m1 "^bench\+[^ ]*/foo\+[^ ]*/IND_CALL$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> - egrep -m1 "^foo\+[^ ]*/bar\+[^ ]*/CALL$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> - egrep -m1 "^bench\+[^ ]*/foo\+[^ ]*/CALL$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> - egrep -m1 "^bench\+[^ ]*/bar\+[^ ]*/CALL$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> - egrep -m1 "^bar\+[^ ]*/foo\+[^ ]*/RET$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> - egrep -m1 "^foo\+[^ ]*/bench\+[^ ]*/RET$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> - egrep -m1 "^bench\+[^ ]*/bench\+[^ ]*/COND$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> - egrep -m1 "^main\+[^ ]*/main\+[^ ]*/UNCOND$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> + egrep -m1 "^brstack_bench\+[^ ]*/brstack_foo\+[^ ]*/IND_CALL$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> + egrep -m1 "^brstack_foo\+[^ ]*/brstack_bar\+[^ ]*/CALL$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> + egrep -m1 "^brstack_bench\+[^ ]*/brstack_foo\+[^ ]*/CALL$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> + egrep -m1 "^brstack_bench\+[^ ]*/brstack_bar\+[^ ]*/CALL$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> + egrep -m1 "^brstack_bar\+[^ ]*/brstack_foo\+[^ ]*/RET$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> + egrep -m1 "^brstack_foo\+[^ ]*/brstsack_bench\+[^ ]*/RET$" $TMPDIR/perf.script > > Small typo here s/brstsack_bench/brstack_bench
With this typo fixed and with the other "-b" fix mentioned:
Tested-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
> > I think James was doing some BRBE work here, so probably best if he also gives his review/test tag. > > Acked-by: German Gomez <german.gomez@arm.com> > >> + egrep -m1 "^brstack_bench\+[^ ]*/brstack_bench\+[^ ]*/COND$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> + egrep -m1 "^brstack\+[^ ]*/brstack\+[^ ]*/UNCOND$" $TMPDIR/perf.script >> set +x >> >> # some branch types are still not being tested: >> @@ -88,10 +49,7 @@ test_filter() { >> >> echo "Testing branch stack filtering permutation ($filter,$expect)" >> >> - gen_test_program "$TEMPDIR/program.c" >> - cc -fno-inline -g "$TEMPDIR/program.c" -o $TMPDIR/a.out >> - >> - perf record -o $TMPDIR/perf.data --branch-filter $filter,save_type,u -- $TMPDIR/a.out > /dev/null 2>&1 >> + perf record -o $TMPDIR/perf.data --branch-filter $filter,save_type,u -- ${TESTPROG} > /dev/null 2>&1 >> perf script -i $TMPDIR/perf.data --fields brstack | xargs -n1 > $TMPDIR/perf.script >> >> # fail if we find any branch type that doesn't match any of the expected ones
| |