From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753133AbbKQIpN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 17 Nov 2015 03:45:13 -0500
Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.65]:6793 "EHLO
	szxga02-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753060AbbKQIpL (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 17 Nov 2015 03:45:11 -0500
Message-ID: <564AE778.2080408@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:38:16 +0800
From: "Wangnan (F)" <wangnan0@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
CC: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>, <lizefan@huawei.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>, <pi3orama@163.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] perf test: Test BPF prologue
References: <1447675815-166222-1-git-send-email-wangnan0@huawei.com> <1447675815-166222-13-git-send-email-wangnan0@huawei.com> <20151117012924.GA22729@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20151117012924.GA22729@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.111.66.109]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0),
	refid=str=0001.0A090205.564AE906.0104,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0,
	ip=0.0.0.0,
	so=2013-06-18 04:22:30,
	dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: d178f11a11e74adf3bd09e12e4bc1c09
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Arnaldo,

On 2015/11/17 9:29, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:

[SNIP]
> I've pushed everything to my perf/ebpf branch, please let me know if
> what is there is acceptable, then it will be up to Ingo to decide where
> to put this, if in perf/urgent for this merge window, or in perf/core,
> for the next one.

I have checked and tested your changes in your perf/ebpf and they
are okay to me.

>
> Ah, to extract the output for these BPF sub-tests I had to use -v, i.e.
> just:
>
>    # perf test BPF
>    37: Test BPF filter                                          : Ok
>    #
>
> Ditto for the LLVM one.
>
> Doesn't tell us too much about all those nice sub-tests...
>
> How about:
>
>    # perf test -v BPF
>    37: Test BPF filter:
>    37.1: test a						       : Ok
>    37.2: test b						       : Ok
>    37.3: Test BPF prologue generation			       : Ok
>    37.4: Another...                                             : Ok
>    37: Test BPF filter					       : Ok
>    #

I have sent a cset based on perf/ebpf in [1]. With the last 3 patch
you will see 'perf test' output information in this way. Please have a try:

# ./perf test LLVM BPF
35: Test LLVM searching and compiling                        :
35.1: Basic BPF llvm compiling test                          : Ok
35.2: Test kbuild searching                                  : Ok
35.3: Compile source for BPF prologue generation test        : Ok
37: Test BPF filter                                          :
37.1: Test basic BPF filtering                               : Ok
37.2: Test BPF prologue generation                           : Ok

Thank you.

[1] 
http://lkml.kernel.org/g/1447749170-175898-1-git-send-email-wangnan0@huawei.com