On 10/09/2025 4:00 pm, Ian Rogers wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 4:14 AM James Clark <james.clark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 28/08/2025 9:59 pm, Ian Rogers wrote:
Mirroring similar work for software events in commit 6e9fa4131abb
("perf parse-events: Remove non-json software events"). These changes
migrate the legacy hardware and cache events to json. With no hard
coded legacy hardware or cache events the wild card, case
insensitivity, etc. is consistent for events. This does, however, mean
events like cycles will wild card against all PMUs. A change doing the
same was originally posted and merged from:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240416061533.921723-10-irogers@xxxxxxxxxx
and reverted by Linus in commit 4f1b067359ac ("Revert "perf
parse-events: Prefer sysfs/JSON hardware events over legacy"") due to
his dislike for the cycles behavior on ARM with perf record. Earlier
patches in this series make perf record event opening failures
non-fatal and hide the cycles event's failure to open on ARM in perf
record, so it is expected the behavior will now be transparent in perf
record on ARM. perf stat with a cycles event will wildcard open the
event on all PMUs.
Hi Ian,
Briefly testing perf record and perf stat seem to work now. i.e "perf
record -e cycles" doesn't fail and just skips the uncore cycles event.
And "perf stat" now includes the uncore cycles event which I think is
harmless.
Thanks for confirming this.
But there are a few perf test failures. For example "test event parsing":
evlist after sorting/fixing: 'arm_cmn_0/cycles/,{cycles,cache-
misses,branch-misses}'
FAILED tests/parse-events.c:1589 wrong number of entries
Event test failure: test 57 '{cycles,cache-misses,branch-
misses}:e'running test 58 'cycles/name=name/'
I suspect the easiest fix for this is to change "cycles" to the
"cpu-cycles" legacy hardware event for this test. The test has always
had issues on ARM due to hardcoded expectations of the core PMU being
"cpu".
The tests "Perf time to TSC" and "Use a dummy software event to keep
tracking" are using libperf to open the cycles event as a sampling event
which now fails. It seems like we've fixed Perf record to ignore this
failure, but we didn't think about libperf until now.
I'm not clear on the connection here. libperf doesn't do event parsing
and so there are no changes in tools/lib/perf. If a test has an
expectation that "cycles" is a core event, again we can change it to
"cpu-cycles" as a workaround for ARM. As "cycles" will wildcard now,
we don't want that behavior in say API probing as we'll end up never
lazily processing the PMUs. That code has been altered in these
changes to specify the core PMU. For tests it is less of an issue and
so the changes are more limited.
Thanks,
Ian
Sure makes sense if there's an easy fix for the tests, we can do that. I
suppose the main reason I mentioned it was that the tests might be
highlighting that other genuine non-Perf and non-test users would see
the same breakage though.
