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: <Y491d1wEW4TfUi5f@kernel.org> <Y4921D+36UGdhK92@kernel.org>
 <Y494TNa0ZyPH9YSD@kernel.org> <Y498YP2N3gvFSr/X@kernel.org>
 <C9F248C8-AF8D-40A1-A1AD-BCC39FBA01C7@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <Y5DNBZNC5rBBqlJW@kernel.org>
 <36CD1041-0CAE-41C1-8086-C17854531B3E@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <Y5JfgyN59dSeKbUP@kernel.org>
 <Y5Jl8MeW90DXy1wT@kernel.org> <8F6F0C27-53F3-4837-A19C-845768253249@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <Y5cxyk3OdgFXlyhS@kernel.org> <BB236C92-3505-4DAB-AE28-A55F74EDE161@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <BB236C92-3505-4DAB-AE28-A55F74EDE161@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From:   Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Dec 2022 14:09:07 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fVVPDo_3cjKmumEVKDN2Zssz-ZU=nYVQFNr1xUGHxx-PQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf build: Use libtraceevent from the system
To:     Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@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>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 1:53 AM Athira Rajeev
<atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 12-Dec-2022, at 7:21 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> =
wrote:
> >
> > Em Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 12:04:18PM +0530, Athira Rajeev escreveu:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 09-Dec-2022, at 4:02 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org=
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Em Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 07:04:52PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo es=
creveu:
> >>>> Em Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 12:21:20PM +0530, Athira Rajeev escreveu:
> >>>>>> On 07-Dec-2022, at 10:57 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel=
.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> Can you try again? tmp.perf/core? That "tmp." part means its a for=
ce
> >>>>>> pushed branch, so I just force pushed with some arch specific fixe=
s, now
> >>>>>> I'm down to (removing the successful builds and unrelated failures=
, now
> >>>>>> related to libbpf's F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC kaboom):
> >>>>
> >>>>> Ok Arnaldo, Sure, I will check with updated branch
> >>>>
> >>>>>> 5     7.38 fedora:34                     : FAIL gcc version 11.3.1=
 20220421 (Red Hat 11.3.1-2) (GCC)
> >>>>>>  /git/perf-6.1.0-rc6/tools/perf/util/evsel.c: In function =E2=80=
=98evsel__rawptr=E2=80=99:
> >>>>>>  /git/perf-6.1.0-rc6/tools/perf/util/evsel.c:2787:36: error: =E2=
=80=98TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE=E2=80=99 undeclared (first use in this function=
); did you mean =E2=80=98TEP_FIELD_IS_FLAG=E2=80=99?
> >>>>>>   2787 |                 if (field->flags & TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE)
> >>>>>>        |                                    ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>>>>        |                                    TEP_FIELD_IS_FLAG
> >>>>
> >>>>> I observed same issue as updated here:
> >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/10476A85-3F75-4C91-AB5B-E5B136F31297@l=
inux.vnet.ibm.com/
> >>>>
> >>>>> Looks like TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE is not defined in header file of t=
he system installed version.
> >>>>> whereas it is there in header file in tools/lib/traceevent
> >>>>
> >>>>> # grep TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE /usr/include/traceevent/event-parse.h
> >>>>> # grep TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE ../lib/traceevent/event-parse.h
> >>>>>   TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE   =3D 256,
> >>>>
> >>>> Right, I had noticed that as well, so as a prep patch I'm adding the
> >>>> patch below, before Ian's. Please check and provide an
> >>>> Acked-by/Tested-by/Reviewed-by if possible.
> >>>
> >>> I ended up with the one below, _after_ Ian's patch as I had some trou=
ble grafting
> >>> it before and had already tested it this way multiple times, I'm push=
ing
> >>> this to tmp/perf.core.
> >>>
> >>> - Arnaldo
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Arnaldo, Ian
> >>
> >> Thanks for the fixes.
> >>
> >> Since we changed =E2=80=9CCONFIG_TRACEEVENT=E2=80=9D to =E2=80=9CCONFI=
G_LIBTRACEEVENT=E2=80=9D,
> >> below change is also needed in =E2=80=9Carch/powerpc/util/Build=E2=80=
=9D
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/Build b/tools/perf/arch/powe=
rpc/util/Build
> >> index 71e57f28abda..9889245c555c 100644
> >> --- a/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/Build
> >> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/Build
> >> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> >> perf-y +=3D header.o
> >> -perf-$(CONFIG_TRACEEVENT) +=3D kvm-stat.o
> >> +perf-$(CONFIG_LIBTRACEEVENT) +=3D kvm-stat.o
> >> perf-y +=3D perf_regs.o
> >> perf-y +=3D mem-events.o
> >> perf-y +=3D sym-handling.o
> >>
> >> With this change, I could successfully compile in these environment:
> >> - Without libtraceevent-devel installed
> >> - With libtraceevent-devel installed
> >> - With =E2=80=9Cmake NO_LIBTRACEEVENT=3D1=E2=80=9D
> >>
> >> With above change,
> >> Acked-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >
> > I did that and the same thing for other architectures, thanks for
> > testing!
> >
> > I'll now give a try at implementing it without
> > tools/build/feature/test-libtraceevent-tep_field_is_relative.c, using
> > just the version of libtraceevent, as Ian suggested.
> >
> > It would be great if you could test it again then,
> >
>
> Sure Arnaldo, I will test with updated code.
>
> Thanks
> Athira


Thanks Athira and Arnaldo. It is a little strange to me to be using
the shell to do a version number test. The intent was to be doing
these in the code:
#if LIBRTRACEEVENT_VERSION >=3D MAKE_LIBTRACEEVENT_VERSION(1, 5, 0)
vs
...
LIBTRACEEVENT_VERSION_WITH_TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE :=3D $(shell expr 1 \*
255 \* 255 + 5 \* 255 + 0) # 1.5.0
ifeq ($(shell test $(LIBTRACEEVENT_VERSION_CPP) -gt
$(LIBTRACEEVENT_VERSION_WITH_TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE); echo $$?),0)
CFLAGS +=3D -DHAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT_TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE
endif
...
#ifdef HAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT_TEP_FIELD_IS_RELATIVE
I'm a little selfish as I'm maintaining a bazel build and a single
version number to maintain is easier than lots of HAVE_... tests. I'm
happy to follow Arnaldo's lead. I think the test should also be
greater-equal rather than greater-than:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/libs/libtrace/libtraceevent.git/tree/include=
/traceevent/event-parse.h?h=3Dlibtraceevent-v1.5#n128

Thanks,
Ian


Ian

> > Thanks,
> >
> > - Arnaldo
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/Build b/tools/perf/arch/arm64/u=
til/Build
> > index 88553c578ed7a1c4..78ef7115be3d91a7 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/Build
> > +++ b/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/Build
> > @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ perf-y +=3D machine.o
> > perf-y +=3D perf_regs.o
> > perf-y +=3D tsc.o
> > perf-y +=3D pmu.o
> > -perf-$(CONFIG_TRACEEVENT) +=3D kvm-stat.o
> > +perf-$(CONFIG_LIBTRACEEVENT) +=3D kvm-stat.o
> > perf-$(CONFIG_DWARF)     +=3D dwarf-regs.o
> > perf-$(CONFIG_LOCAL_LIBUNWIND) +=3D unwind-libunwind.o
> > perf-$(CONFIG_LIBDW_DWARF_UNWIND) +=3D unwind-libdw.o
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/Build b/tools/perf/arch/power=
pc/util/Build
> > index 71e57f28abdac7e9..9889245c555c4cfb 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/Build
> > +++ b/tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/Build
> > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> > perf-y +=3D header.o
> > -perf-$(CONFIG_TRACEEVENT) +=3D kvm-stat.o
> > +perf-$(CONFIG_LIBTRACEEVENT) +=3D kvm-stat.o
> > perf-y +=3D perf_regs.o
> > perf-y +=3D mem-events.o
> > perf-y +=3D sym-handling.o
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/s390/util/Build b/tools/perf/arch/s390/uti=
l/Build
> > index aa8a5f05c9cb4706..db68840869979f2c 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/arch/s390/util/Build
> > +++ b/tools/perf/arch/s390/util/Build
> > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> > perf-y +=3D header.o
> > -perf-$(CONFIG_TRACEEVENT) +=3D kvm-stat.o
> > +perf-$(CONFIG_LIBTRACEEVENT) +=3D kvm-stat.o
> > perf-y +=3D perf_regs.o
> >
> > perf-$(CONFIG_DWARF) +=3D dwarf-regs.o
>