Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] perf test: Add pmu-event test for "Compat" and new event_field.

[John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>]

On 28/07/2023 07:17, Jing Zhang wrote:
> Add new event test for uncore system event which is used to verify the
> functionality of "Compat" matching multiple identifiers and the new event
> fields "EventIdCode" and "Type".
> 

Thanks for doing this. It looks ok. I just have a comment, below.

> Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <renyu.zj@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>   .../pmu-events/arch/test/test_soc/sys/uncore.json  |  8 ++++
>   tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c                      | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>   2 files changed, 63 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/test/test_soc/sys/uncore.json b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/test/test_soc/sys/uncore.json
> index c7e7528..879a0ae 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/test/test_soc/sys/uncore.json
> +++ b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/test/test_soc/sys/uncore.json
> @@ -12,5 +12,13 @@
>              "EventName": "sys_ccn_pmu.read_cycles",
>              "Unit": "sys_ccn_pmu",
>              "Compat": "0x01"
> +   },
> +   {
> +           "BriefDescription": "Counts total cache misses in first lookup result (high priority).",
> +           "Type": "0x05",
> +           "EventIdCode": "0x01",
> +           "EventName": "sys_cmn_pmu.hnf_cache_miss",
> +           "Unit": "arm_cmn",
> +           "Compat": "434*;436*;43c*;43a01"
>      }
>   ]
> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c b/tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c
> index 1dff863b..e227dcd 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/pmu-events.c
> @@ -255,9 +255,24 @@ struct perf_pmu_test_pmu {
>   	.matching_pmu = "uncore_sys_ccn_pmu",
>   };
>   
> +static const struct perf_pmu_test_event sys_cmn_pmu_hnf_cache_miss = {
> +	.event = {
> +		.name = "sys_cmn_pmu.hnf_cache_miss",
> +		.event = "type=0x05,eventid=0x01",
> +		.desc = "Counts total cache misses in first lookup result (high priority). Unit: uncore_arm_cmn ",
> +		.topic = "uncore",
> +		.pmu = "uncore_arm_cmn",
> +		.compat = "434*;436*;43c*;43a01",
> +	},
> +	.alias_str = "type=0x5,eventid=0x1",
> +	.alias_long_desc = "Counts total cache misses in first lookup result (high priority). Unit: uncore_arm_cmn ",
> +	.matching_pmu = "uncore_arm_cmn_0",
> +};
> +
>   static const struct perf_pmu_test_event *sys_events[] = {
>   	&sys_ddr_pmu_write_cycles,
>   	&sys_ccn_pmu_read_cycles,
> +	&sys_cmn_pmu_hnf_cache_miss,
>   	NULL
>   };
>   
> @@ -699,6 +714,46 @@ static int __test_uncore_pmu_event_aliases(struct perf_pmu_test_pmu *test_pmu)
>   			&sys_ccn_pmu_read_cycles,
>   		},
>   	},
> +	{
> +		.pmu = {
> +			.name = (char *)"uncore_arm_cmn_0",
> +			.is_uncore = 1,
> +			.id = (char *)"43401",
> +		},
> +		.aliases = {
> +			&sys_cmn_pmu_hnf_cache_miss,
> +		},
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.pmu = {
> +			.name = (char *)"uncore_arm_cmn_0",
> +			.is_uncore = 1,
> +			.id = (char *)"43602",
> +		},
> +		.aliases = {
> +			&sys_cmn_pmu_hnf_cache_miss,
> +		},
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.pmu = {
> +			.name = (char *)"uncore_arm_cmn_1",

Shouldn't this match some perf_pmu_test_event entry with same 
matching_pmu member? But is perf_pmu_test_event.matching_pmu member ever 
used for any checking???

Thanks,
John

> +			.is_uncore = 1,
> +			.id = (char *)"43c03",
> +		},
> +		.aliases = {
> +			&sys_cmn_pmu_hnf_cache_miss,
> +		},
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.pmu = {
> +			.name = (char *)"uncore_arm_cmn_1",
> +			.is_uncore = 1,
> +			.id = (char *)"43a01",
> +		},
> +		.aliases = {
> +			&sys_cmn_pmu_hnf_cache_miss,
> +		},
> +	}
>   };
>   
>   /* Test that aliases generated are as expected */