On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 02:53:07PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > breakpoint tests on the ARM 32-bit kernel are broken in several ways. > > The breakpoint length requested does not necessarily match whether the > function address has the Thumb bit (bit 0) set or not, and this does > matter to the ARM kernel hw_breakpoint infrastructure. See [1] for > background. > > [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/15/205 > > As Will indicated, the overflow handling would require single-stepping > which is not supported at the moment. Just disable those tests for the > ARM 32-bit platforms. > > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.faine...@gmail.com> > --- > tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c > index a467615c5a0e..3b5471ea2331 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c > +++ b/tools/perf/tests/bp_signal.c > @@ -296,7 +296,7 @@ bool test__bp_signal_is_supported(void) > * instruction breakpoint using the perf event interface. > * Once it's there we can release this. > */ > -#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__) > +#if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__s390x__) || defined(__arm__) > return false; > #else
I'm ok with disabling the test, but the comment above this #if is all about powerpc. Will
