Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] perf cs_etm: Basic support for virtual/kernel timestamps

From: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, tanmay@marvell.com,
	leo.yan@linaro.org, mike.leach@linaro.org, sgoutham@marvell.com,
	gcherian@marvell.com, lcherian@marvell.com,
	bbhushan2@marvell.com,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	coresight@lists.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] perf cs_etm: Basic support for virtual/kernel timestamps
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 14:39:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <72843540-fe25-d805-df76-3a3556fb5774@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y8l20EOD6vtvJw83@kernel.org>

On 19/01/2023 16:58, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 03:42:59PM +0000, James Clark escreveu:
>> Changes since v3:
>>
>>   * Scale time estimates by INSTR_PER_NS, rather than assuming 1
>>     instruction = 1ns
>>   * Add a new commit that fixes some issues around timestamps going
>>     backwards
>>   * Use nanoseconds inside cs-etm-decoder.c, rather than storing the
>>     raw time values and converting when a sample is synthesized. This
>>     simplifies some of the code like estimating the first timestamp.
> 
> I would check this myself, but since Suzuki had some review comments and
> you may consider a v5, please check this:
> 
> Cover: ./v4_20230119_james_clark_perf_cs_etm_basic_support_for_virtual_kernel_timestamps.cover
>  Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230119154308.3815108-1-james.clark@arm.com
>        git checkout -b v4_20230119_james_clark_arm_com 69b41ac87e4a664de78a395ff97166f0b2943210
>        git am ./v4_20230119_james_clark_perf_cs_etm_basic_support_for_virtual_kernel_timestamps.mbx
> [acme@quaco perf]$        git am ./v4_20230119_james_clark_perf_cs_etm_basic_support_for_virtual_kernel_timestamps.mbx
> Applying: perf: Remove duplication around EVENT_SOURCE_DEVICE_PATH
> error: patch failed: tools/perf/util/pmu.c:1993
> error: tools/perf/util/pmu.c: patch does not apply
> error: patch failed: tools/perf/util/pmu.h:259
> error: tools/perf/util/pmu.h: patch does not apply
> Patch failed at 0001 perf: Remove duplication around EVENT_SOURCE_DEVICE_PATH
> hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
> When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
> If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
> To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
> [acme@quaco perf]$
> 
> Probably a conflict with one of these:
> 
> [acme@quaco perf]$ git log --oneline -5 tools/perf/util/pmu.c
> acef233b7ca749fd perf pmu: Add #slots literal support for arm64
> 336b92da1aa4228a perf tool: Move pmus list variable to a new file
> 49bd97c28b7e7f01 perf tools: Use dedicated non-atomic clear/set bit helpers
> e5c6109f4813246a perf list: Reorganize to use callbacks to allow honouring command line options
> eb2d4514a5971444 perf pmu: Restructure print_pmu_events() to avoid memory allocations
> [acme@quaco perf]$
> 
> Update to my perf/core branch or even tmp.perf/core which is newer but
> still needs the full set of container build tests.

Oops I must have just missed the latest perf/core update. I fixed the
conflict and sent a v5, and decided to not make any changes for Suzuki's
comments.

Thanks
James