On 3 Dec 2024, at 11:46 PM, Namhyung Kim [off-list ref] wrote:

Hello,

On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 10:50:10AM +0530, Athira Rajeev wrote:

quoted

quoted

On 7 Nov 2024, at 7:26 PM, Leo Yan [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi Athira,

On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 03:04:57PM +0530, Athira Rajeev wrote:

[...]

quoted

quoted

Hi Athira,

sorry for the breakage and thank you for the detailed explanation. As
the code will run on AMD I think your change will break that - . It is
probably safest to keep the ".. else { .." for this case but guard it
in the ifdef.

Hi Ian

Thanks for your comments. Does the below change looks good ?

diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/expr.c b/tools/perf/tests/expr.c
index e3aa9d4fcf3a..f5b2d96bb59b 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/expr.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/expr.c

@@ -74,14 +74,12 @@ static int test__expr(struct test_suite *t __maybe_unused, int subtest __maybe_u
  double val, num_cpus_online, num_cpus, num_cores, num_dies, num_packages;
  int ret;
  struct expr_parse_ctx *ctx;
-    bool is_intel = false;
  char strcmp_cpuid_buf[256];
  struct perf_pmu *pmu = perf_pmus__find_core_pmu();
  char *cpuid = perf_pmu__getcpuid(pmu);
  char *escaped_cpuid1, *escaped_cpuid2;

  TEST_ASSERT_VAL("get_cpuid", cpuid);
-    is_intel = strstr(cpuid, "Intel") != NULL;

  TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL("ids_union", test_ids_union(), 0);

@@ -244,11 +242,13 @@ static int test__expr(struct test_suite *t __maybe_unused, int subtest __maybe_u
  if (num_dies) // Some platforms do not have CPU die support, for example s390
      TEST_ASSERT_VAL("#num_dies >= #num_packages", num_dies >= num_packages);

+#if defined(__i386__) && defined(__x86_64__)
  TEST_ASSERT_VAL("#system_tsc_freq", expr__parse(&val, ctx, "#system_tsc_freq") == 0);
-    if (is_intel)
+    if (strstr(cpuid, "Intel") != NULL)
      TEST_ASSERT_VAL("#system_tsc_freq > 0", val > 0);
  else
      TEST_ASSERT_VAL("#system_tsc_freq == 0", fpclassify(val) == FP_ZERO);
+#endif

  /*
   * Source count returns the number of events aggregating in a leader

I confirmed the change above fixes the failure on Arm64.

Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>

Thanks Leo Yan for testing.

Hi Ian,

If the change above looks good, I will post a V2 . Please share your review comments

Sorry for the delay, it looks good to me.  Can you please send the v2?

Hi Namhyung

Thanks for checking on this.
I will test with the latest version sent by Ian and respond with the results soon

Thanks
Athira Rajeev

Thanks,
Namhyung