Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
Date:   Thu, 26 Oct 2023 13:32:38 +0800
From:   Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
To:     James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, coresight@lists.linaro.org,
        suzuki.poulose@arm.com, atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        tianruidong@linux.alibaba.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        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>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Kajol Jain <kjain@linux.ibm.com>,
        Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>,
        Anushree Mathur <anushree.mathur@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tests: test_arm_coresight: Simplify source iteration
Message-ID: <20231026053238.GB111732@leoy-huanghe.lan>
References: <20231023131550.487760-1-james.clark@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231023131550.487760-1-james.clark@arm.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 02:15:49PM +0100, James Clark wrote:
> There are two reasons to do this, firstly there is a shellcheck warning
> in cs_etm_dev_name(), which can be completely deleted. And secondly the
> current iteration method doesn't support systems with both ETE and ETM
> because it picks one or the other. There isn't a known system with this
> configuration, but it could happen in the future.
> 
> Iterating over all the sources for each CPU can be done by going through
> /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cs_etm/cpu* and following the symlink back
> to the Coresight device in /sys/bus/coresight/devices. This will work
> whether the device is ETE, ETM or any future name, and is much simpler
> and doesn't require any hard coded version numbers
> 
> Suggested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>

Looks good to me.  And I did a test for it:

Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>