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: <1668052208-14047-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
 <c71e9666-c62a-83ae-0d7b-580dc717e9f1@loongson.cn> <dbf82707-df17-466b-f882-aa4e25d4f629@loongson.cn>
In-Reply-To: <dbf82707-df17-466b-f882-aa4e25d4f629@loongson.cn>
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 6 Jan 2023 13:04:42 -0800
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cgH0zK-DUmUV7yw1BJBvgyxWys9zPuB5Q7dQQwta=XcGA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] perf: Add more syscalls to benchmark
To:     Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Cc:     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@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 5:23 PM Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/03/2022 05:19 PM, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/10/2022 11:50 AM, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
> >> Tested on x86_64, arm64, mips64 and loongarch64.
> >>
> >> Tiezhu Yang (4):
> >>   tools x86: Keep list sorted by number in unistd_{32,64}.h
> >>   perf bench syscall: Introduce bench_syscall_common()
> >>   perf bench syscall: Add getpgid syscall benchmark
> >>   perf bench syscall: Add execve syscall benchmark
> >>
> >>  tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/unistd_32.h | 23 ++++++---
> >>  tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/unistd_64.h | 23 ++++++---
> >>  tools/perf/bench/bench.h                    |  2 +
> >>  tools/perf/bench/syscall.c                  | 76
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>  tools/perf/builtin-bench.c                  |  2 +
> >>  5 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >>
> >
> > Ping, any more comments?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Tiezhu
>
> Hi all,
>
> If this patch series has no value and is not acceptable,
> or what should I do to update, please let me know.

I'm so sorry about being late a lot.
I don't have any objection to this series.

For the execve bench, I think it's actually fork + execve
then maybe it makes sense to have a fork only bench
to compare the execve part precisely.

But it can be added later, so

Acked-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>

Thanks,
Namhyung