On Tue, 2025-07-15 at 16:48 +0200, Nam Cao wrote:

On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 09:14:25AM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote:

quoted

The current behaviour of rvgen when running with the -a option is
to
append the necessary lines at the end of the configuration for
Kconfig,
Makefile and tracepoints.
This is not always the desired behaviour in case of nested
monitors:
while tracepoints are not affected by nesting and the Makefile's
only
requirement is that the parent monitor is built before its
children, in
the Kconfig it is better to have children defined right after their
parent, otherwise the result has wrong indentation:

[*]   foo_parent monitor
[*]     foo_child1 monitor
[*]     foo_child2 monitor
[*]   bar_parent monitor
[*]     bar_child1 monitor
[*]     bar_child2 monitor
[*]   foo_child3 monitor
[*]   foo_child4 monitor

Adapt rvgen to look for a different marker for nested monitors in
the
Kconfig file and append the line right after the last sibling,
instead
of the last monitor.
Also add the marker when creating a new parent monitor.

Signed-off-by: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/trace/rv/Kconfig                     |  5 +++++
 tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/container.py | 13 +++++++++++++
 tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/generator.py | 13 ++++++++-----
 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/trace/rv/Kconfig b/kernel/trace/rv/Kconfig
index c11bf7e61ebf0..26017378f79b8 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/rv/Kconfig
+++ b/kernel/trace/rv/Kconfig

@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ config RV_PER_TASK_MONITORS

 
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/wip/Kconfig"
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/wwnr/Kconfig"
+
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/sched/Kconfig"
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/tss/Kconfig"
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/sco/Kconfig"

@@ -50,9 +51,13 @@ source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/snroc/Kconfig"

 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/scpd/Kconfig"
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/snep/Kconfig"
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/sncid/Kconfig"
+# Add new sched monitors here
+
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/rtapp/Kconfig"
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/pagefault/Kconfig"
 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/sleep/Kconfig"
+# Add new rtapp monitors here
+
 # Add new monitors here
 
 config RV_REACTORS

diff --git a/tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/container.py

b/tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/container.py
index 47d8ab2ad3ec4..fee493f89fde6 100644

--- a/tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/container.py
+++ b/tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/container.py

@@ -20,3 +20,16 @@ class Container(generator.RVGenerator):

         main_h = self.main_h
         main_h = main_h.replace("%%MODEL_NAME%%", self.name)
         return main_h
+
+    def fill_kconfig_tooltip(self):
+        """Override to produce a marker for this container in the
Kconfig"""
+        container_marker = f"# Add new {self.name} monitors
here\n"
+        if self.auto_patch:
+            self._patch_file("Kconfig",
+                            "# Add new monitors here", "")

Isn't this one excessive? I gave it a try, but I had double blank
line:

python3 tools/verification/rvgen -a container -n hello

   61 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/sleep/Kconfig"
   62 # Add new rtapp monitors here
   63 
+  64 
+  65 source "kernel/trace/rv/monitors/hello/Kconfig"
+  66 # Add new hello monitors here
+  67 
   68 # Add new monitors here
   69 
   70 config RV_REACTORS

Yeah indeed it is, thanks for finding out, it somehow slipped my
tests..

quoted

+        result = super().fill_kconfig_tooltip()
+        if self.auto_patch:
+            self._patch_file("Kconfig",
+                            "# Add new monitors here",
container_marker)
+            return result
+        return result + container_marker

diff --git a/tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/generator.py

b/tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/generator.py
index 19d0078a38032..ac97c4505ff00 100644

--- a/tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/generator.py
+++ b/tools/verification/rvgen/rvgen/generator.py

@@ -137,7 +137,8 @@ class RVGenerator:

         kconfig = kconfig.replace("%%MONITOR_DEPS%%",
monitor_deps)
         return kconfig
 
-    def __patch_file(self, file, marker, line):
+    def _patch_file(self, file, marker, line):
+        assert(self.auto_patch)
         file_to_patch = os.path.join(self.rv_dir, file)
         content = self._read_file(file_to_patch)
         content = content.replace(marker, line + "\n" + marker)

@@ -146,7 +147,7 @@ class RVGenerator:

     def fill_tracepoint_tooltip(self):
         monitor_class_type = self.fill_monitor_class_type()
         if self.auto_patch:
-            self.__patch_file("rv_trace.h",
+            self._patch_file("rv_trace.h",
                             "// Add new monitors based on
CONFIG_%s here" % monitor_class_type,
                             "#include <monitors/%s/%s_trace.h>" %
(self.name, self.name))
             return "  - Patching %s/rv_trace.h, double check the
result" % self.rv_dir

@@ -158,8 +159,10 @@ Add this line where other tracepoints are

included and %s is defined:
 
     def fill_kconfig_tooltip(self):
         if self.auto_patch:
-            self.__patch_file("Kconfig",
-                            "# Add new monitors here",
+            # monitors with a container should stay together in
the Kconfig
+            self._patch_file("Kconfig",
+                            "# Add new %smonitors here" %
+                              (self.parent + " " if self.parent
else ""),

This one must be kept in sync with container_marker in
Container.fill_kconfig_tooltip(). I think this is hard to maintain
later
on.

How about we keep in centralized with a helper function, something
like:

def container_marker(container: str) -> str:
    return f"# Add new {container} monitors here\n"

Good point, will do.

Thanks,
Gabriele