Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220907050407.2711513-1-namhyung@kernel.org> <CAPhsuW4OT3XC8oREZBNreesYyVvU9hSGs5Hgz=r-cwsQSkiXRQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPhsuW4OT3XC8oREZBNreesYyVvU9hSGs5Hgz=r-cwsQSkiXRQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 6 Sep 2022 23:58:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cjZ4jJDx0wL5BQ1f4BvT=r0S72Z_q83WwvOdB8cQGzRKw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf test: Skip sigtrap test on old kernels
To:     Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
        linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Song,

On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 10:58 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 10:04 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > If it runs on an old kernel, perf_event_open would fail because of the
> > new fields sigtrap and sig_data.  Just skipping the test could miss an
> > actual bug in the kernel.
> >
> > Let's check BTF if it has the perf_event_attr.sigtrap field.
> >
> > Cc: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> > Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c b/tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c
> > index e32ece90e164..32f08ce0f2b0 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/tests/sigtrap.c
> > @@ -16,6 +16,8 @@
> >  #include <sys/syscall.h>
> >  #include <unistd.h>
> >
> > +#include <bpf/btf.h>
> > +
>
> Do we need "#ifdef HAVE_BPF_SKEL" for the include part?

Right, it'd be better to move it under the #ifdef.  Will change.

>
> Other than this, looks good to me.
>
> Acked-by: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>

Thanks for the review!
Namhyung