kernel/tools/perf/tests/shell/stat_bpf_counters.sh, branch linux-rolling-stable

perf test: Change all remaining #!/bin/sh to #!/bin/bash

2025-06-26T17:31:05Z

There are 43 instances of posix shell tests and 35 instances of bash. To give us a single consistent language for testing in, replace all #!/bin/sh to #!/bin/bash. Common sources that are included in both different shells will now work as expected. And we no longer have to fix up bashisms that appear to work when someone's system has sh symlinked to bash, but don't work on other systems that have both shells installed. Although we could have chosen sh, it's not backwards compatible so it wouldn't be possible to bulk convert without re-writing the existing bash tests. Choosing bash also gives us some nicer features including 'local' variable definitions and regexes in if statements that are already widely used in the tests. It's not expected that there are any users with only sh available due to the large number of bash tests that exist. Discussed in relation to running shellcheck here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/e3751a74be34bbf3781c4644f518702a7270220b.1749785642.git.collin.funk1@gmail.com/ Signed-off-by: James Clark Reviewed-by: Collin Funk Acked-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250623-james-perf-bash-tests-v1-1-f572f54d4559@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim

perf test: Use sqrtloop workload to test bperf event

2024-11-02T06:31:08Z

Replace `brstack` workload with `sqrtloop` workload, because `sqrtloop` workload contains fork(), which is suitable for testing the bperf event inheritance feature. Signed-off-by: Tengda Wu Cc: song@kernel.org Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241021110201.325617-3-wutengda@huaweicloud.com Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim

perf test: Tag parallel failing shell tests with "(exclusive)"

2024-10-28T16:32:58Z

Some shell tests compete for resources and so can't run with other tests, tag such tests. The "(exclusive)" stems from shared/exclusive to describe how the tests run as if holding a lock. For ARM/coresight tests: Suggested-by: James Clark Additional failing tests: Suggested-by: Namhyung Kim Tested-by: James Clark Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers Cc: Colin Ian King Cc: Howard Chu Cc: Weilin Wang Cc: Ilya Leoshkevich Cc: Thomas Richter Cc: Andi Kleen Cc: Dapeng Mi Cc: Athira Jajeev Cc: Michael Petlan Cc: Veronika Molnarova Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241025192109.132482-6-irogers@google.com Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim

perf test stat_bpf_counter.sh: Stabilize the test results

2024-06-26T18:10:58Z

The test has been failing for some time when two separate runs of perf benchmarks are recorded for cycles events and their counts are compared, while once the recording was done with option --bpf-counters and once without it. It is expected that the count of the samples should be within a certain range, firstly the difference was set to be within 10%, which was then later raised to 20%. However, the test case keeps failing on certain architectures as recording the provided benchmark can produce completely different counts based on the current load of the system. Sampling two separate runs on intel-eaglestream-spr-13 of "perf stat --no-big-num -e cycles -- perf bench sched messaging -g 1 -l 100 -t": Performance counter stats for 'perf bench sched messaging -g 1 -l 100 -t': 396782898 cycles 0.010051983 seconds time elapsed 0.008664000 seconds user 0.097058000 seconds sys Performance counter stats for 'perf bench sched messaging -g 1 -l 100 -t': 1431133032 cycles 0.021803714 seconds time elapsed 0.023377000 seconds user 0.349918000 seconds sys , which is ranging from 400mil to 1400mil samples. Instead of recording the cycles use instructions event, which provides more stable values. At the same time change the tested workload to one of the provided testing workloads by perf that is not based on a scheduler, which can provide another dependency on the current load. Sampling instructions event with the new workload provide much more stable results on intel-eaglestream-spr-13 of "perf stat --no-big-num -e instructions -- perf test -w brstack": Performance counter stats for 'perf test -w brstack': 64584494 instructions 0.009173945 seconds time elapsed 0.007262000 seconds user 0.002071000 seconds sys Performance counter stats for 'perf test -w brstack': 64672669 instructions 0.008888135 seconds time elapsed 0.005018000 seconds user 0.004018000 seconds sys Signed-off-by: Veronika Molnarova Acked-by: Namhyung Kim Cc: mpetlan@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240625092001.10909-1-vmolnaro@redhat.com

perf test bpf-counters: Add test for BPF event modifier

2024-04-19T01:22:51Z

Refactor test to better enable sharing of logic, to give an idea of progress and introduce test functions. Add test of measuring both cycles and cycles:b simultaneously. Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers Cc: Adrian Hunter Cc: Alexander Shishkin Cc: Athira Rajeev Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Jiri Olsa Cc: Kan Liang Cc: Mark Rutland Cc: Namhyung Kim Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ravi Bangoria Cc: Song Liu Cc: Thomas Richter Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240416170014.985191-2-irogers@google.com Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo

perf test: raise limit to 20 percent for perf_stat_--bpf-counters_test

2024-01-22T20:08:19Z

This test case often fails on s390 (about 2 out of 10) because the 10% percent limit on the difference between --bpf-counters event counting and s390 hardware counting is more than 10% in all failure cases. Raise the limit to 20% on s390 and the test case succeeds. Signed-off-by: Thomas Richter Acked-by: Namhyung Kim Cc: gor@linux.ibm.com Cc: hca@linux.ibm.com Cc: sumanthk@linux.ibm.com Cc: svens@linux.ibm.com Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240108084009.3959211-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim

perf test shell stat_bpf_counters: Fix test on Intel

2023-08-29T17:16:14Z

As of now, bpf counters (bperf) don't support event groups. But the default perf stat includes topdown metrics if supported (on recent Intel machines) which require groups. That makes perf stat exiting. $ sudo perf stat --bpf-counter true bpf managed perf events do not yet support groups. Actually the test explicitly uses cycles event only, but it missed to pass the option when it checks the availability of the command. Fixes: 2c0cb9f56020d2ea ("perf test: Add a shell test for 'perf stat --bpf-counters' new option") Reviewed-by: Song Liu Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim Cc: Adrian Hunter Cc: Ian Rogers Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Jiri Olsa Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230825164152.165610-2-namhyung@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo

perf tests stat_bpf_counters: Fix usage of '==' to address shellcheck warning

2023-08-03T20:01:25Z

Running shellcheck on stat_bpf_counter.sh generates below warning: In tests/shell/stat_bpf_counters.sh line 34: if [ "$base_cycles" == "