Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 13 Oct 2021 10:46:01 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20211013174604.747276-1-irogers@google.com>
Message-Id: <20211013174604.747276-20-irogers@google.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <20211013174604.747276-1-irogers@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 19/22] perf test: BP tests, remove is_supported use
From:   Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Jin Yao <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>,
        John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>,
        "Paul A . Clarke" <pc@us.ibm.com>,
        linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Cc:     eranian@google.com, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Migrate the is_supported functionality to returning TEST_SKIP.
Motivation is kunit has no is_supported function.

Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
---
 tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c         | 45 +++++++++++----------------
 tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c          | 43 ++++---------------------
 tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c | 16 ++++------
 tools/perf/tests/tests.h              | 21 ++++++++++++-
 4 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 74 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c b/tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c
index e4f7b635ffef..d1ebb5561e5b 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/bp_account.c
@@ -19,6 +19,19 @@
 #include "../perf-sys.h"
 #include "cloexec.h"
 
+/*
+ * PowerPC and S390 do not support creation of instruction breakpoints using the
+ * perf_event interface.
+ *
+ * Just disable the test for these architectures until these issues are
+ * resolved.
+ */
+#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__)
+#define BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED 0
+#else
+#define BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED 1
+#endif
+
 static volatile long the_var;
 
 static noinline int test_function(void)
@@ -180,6 +193,11 @@ static int test__bp_accounting(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subte
 	int bp_cnt = detect_cnt(true);
 	int share  = detect_share(wp_cnt, bp_cnt);
 
+	if (!BP_ACCOUNT_IS_SUPPORTED) {
+		pr_debug("Test not supported on this architecture");
+		return TEST_SKIP;
+	}
+
 	pr_debug("watchpoints count %d, breakpoints count %d, has_ioctl %d, share %d\n",
 		 wp_cnt, bp_cnt, has_ioctl, share);
 
@@ -189,29 +207,4 @@ static int test__bp_accounting(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subte
 	return bp_accounting(wp_cnt, share);
 }
 
-static bool test__bp_account_is_supported(void)
-{
-	/*
-	 * PowerPC and S390 do not support creation of instruction
-	 * breakpoints using the perf_event interface.
-	 *
-	 * Just disable the test for these architectures until these
-	 * issues are resolved.
-	 */
-#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__)
-	return false;
-#else
-	return true;
-#endif
-}
-
-static struct test_case bp_accounting_tests[] = {
-	TEST_CASE("Breakpoint accounting", bp_accounting),
-	{ .name = NULL, }
-};
-
-struct test_suite suite__bp_accounting = {
-	.desc = "Breakpoint accounting",
-	.test_cases = bp_accounting_tests,
-	.is_supported = test__bp_account_is_supported,
-};
+DEFINE_SUITE("Breakpoint accounting", bp_accounting);
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
index 1676e3a11906..1f2908f02389 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c
@@ -166,6 +166,11 @@ static int test__bp_signal(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subtest _
 	struct sigaction sa;
 	long long count1, count2, count3;
 
+	if (!BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED) {
+		pr_debug("Test not supported on this architecture");
+		return TEST_SKIP;
+	}
+
 	/* setup SIGIO signal handler */
 	memset(&sa, 0, sizeof(struct sigaction));
 	sa.sa_sigaction = (void *) sig_handler;
@@ -285,40 +290,4 @@ static int test__bp_signal(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subtest _
 		TEST_OK : TEST_FAIL;
 }
 
-bool test__bp_signal_is_supported(void)
-{
-	/*
-	 * PowerPC and S390 do not support creation of instruction
-	 * breakpoints using the perf_event interface.
-	 *
-	 * ARM requires explicit rounding down of the instruction
-	 * pointer in Thumb mode, and then requires the single-step
-	 * to be handled explicitly in the overflow handler to avoid
-	 * stepping into the SIGIO handler and getting stuck on the
-	 * breakpointed instruction.
-	 *
-	 * Since arm64 has the same issue with arm for the single-step
-	 * handling, this case also gets stuck on the breakpointed
-	 * instruction.
-	 *
-	 * Just disable the test for these architectures until these
-	 * issues are resolved.
-	 */
-#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__) || defined(__arm__) || \
-    defined(__aarch64__)
-	return false;
-#else
-	return true;
-#endif
-}
-
-static struct test_case bp_signal_tests[] = {
-	TEST_CASE("Breakpoint overflow signal handler", bp_signal),
-	{ .name = NULL, }
-};
-
-struct test_suite suite__bp_signal = {
-	.desc = "Breakpoint overflow signal handler",
-	.test_cases = bp_signal_tests,
-	.is_supported = test__bp_signal_is_supported,
-};
+DEFINE_SUITE("Breakpoint overflow signal handler", bp_signal);
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c
index bc1f13851750..4e897c2cf26b 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal_overflow.c
@@ -66,6 +66,11 @@ static int test__bp_signal_overflow(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int
 	long long count;
 	int fd, i, fails = 0;
 
+	if (!BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED) {
+		pr_debug("Test not supported on this architecture");
+		return TEST_SKIP;
+	}
+
 	/* setup SIGIO signal handler */
 	memset(&sa, 0, sizeof(struct sigaction));
 	sa.sa_sigaction = (void *) sig_handler;
@@ -134,13 +139,4 @@ static int test__bp_signal_overflow(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int
 	return fails ? TEST_FAIL : TEST_OK;
 }
 
-static struct test_case bp_signal_overflow_tests[] = {
-	TEST_CASE("Breakpoint overflow sampling", bp_signal_overflow),
-	{ .name = NULL, }
-};
-
-struct test_suite suite__bp_signal_overflow = {
-	.desc = "Breakpoint overflow sampling",
-	.test_cases = bp_signal_overflow_tests,
-	.is_supported = test__bp_signal_is_supported,
-};
+DEFINE_SUITE("Breakpoint overflow sampling", bp_signal_overflow);
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/tests.h b/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
index cae33c375d55..958f94dcc94c 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/tests.h
@@ -151,7 +151,26 @@ DECLARE_SUITE(expand_cgroup_events);
 DECLARE_SUITE(perf_time_to_tsc);
 DECLARE_SUITE(dlfilter);
 
-bool test__bp_signal_is_supported(void);
+/*
+ * PowerPC and S390 do not support creation of instruction breakpoints using the
+ * perf_event interface.
+ *
+ * ARM requires explicit rounding down of the instruction pointer in Thumb mode,
+ * and then requires the single-step to be handled explicitly in the overflow
+ * handler to avoid stepping into the SIGIO handler and getting stuck on the
+ * breakpointed instruction.
+ *
+ * Since arm64 has the same issue with arm for the single-step handling, this
+ * case also gets stuck on the breakpointed instruction.
+ *
+ * Just disable the test for these architectures until these issues are
+ * resolved.
+ */
+#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__) || defined(__arm__) || defined(__aarch64__)
+#define BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED 0
+#else
+#define BP_SIGNAL_IS_SUPPORTED 1
+#endif
 
 #ifdef HAVE_DWARF_UNWIND_SUPPORT
 struct thread;
-- 
2.33.0.882.g93a45727a2-goog