> On 05-Oct-2023, at 3:06 PM, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poul...@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 05/10/2023 06:02, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 9:11 PM Athira Rajeev
>> <atraj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Running shellcheck on tests/shell/test_arm_coresight.sh
>>> throws below warnings:
>>>
>>> In tests/shell/test_arm_coresight.sh line 15:
>>> cs_etm_path=$(find /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cs_etm/ -name
>>> cpu* -print -quit)
>>> ^--^ SC2061: Quote the parameter to -name so the shell
>>> won't interpret it.
>>>
>>> In tests/shell/test_arm_coresight.sh line 20:
>>> if [ $archhver -eq 5 -a "$(printf "0x%X\n" $archpart)" =
>>> "0xA13" ] ; then
>>> ^-- SC2166: Prefer [ p ] && [ q ] as [
>>> p -a q ] is not well defined
>>>
>>> This warning is observed after commit:
>>> "commit bb350847965d ("perf test: Update cs_etm testcase for Arm ETE")"
>>>
>>> Fixed this issue by using quoting 'cpu*' for SC2061 and
>>> using "&&" in line number 20 for SC2166 warning
>>>
>>> Fixes: bb350847965d ("perf test: Update cs_etm testcase for Arm ETE")
>>> Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev <atraj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Thanks for the fix.
>
> Nothing to do with this patch, but I am wondering if the original patch
> is over engineered and may not be future proof.
>
> e.g.,
>
> cs_etm_dev_name() {
> + cs_etm_path=$(find /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cs_etm/ -name cpu* -print
> -quit)
>
> Right there you got the device name and we can easily deduce the name of
> the "ETM" node.
>
> e.g,:
> etm=$(basename $(readlink cs_etm_path) | sed "s/[0-9]\+$//")
>
> And practically, nobody prevents an ETE mixed with an ETM on a "hybrid"
> system (hopefully, no one builds it ;-))
>
> Also, instead of hardcoding "ete" and "etm" prefixes from the arch part,
> we should simply use the cpu nodes from :
>
> /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cs_etm/
>
> e.g.,
>
> arm_cs_etm_traverse_path_test() {
> # Iterate for every ETM device
> for c in /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cs_etm/cpu*; do
> # Read the link to be on the safer side
> dev=`readlink $c`
>
> # Find the ETM device belonging to which CPU
> cpu=`cat $dev/cpu`
>
> # Use depth-first search (DFS) to iterate outputs
> arm_cs_iterate_devices $dev $cpu
> done;
> }
>
>
>
>> You'd better add Coresight folks on this.
>> Maybe this file was missing in the MAINTAINERS file.
>
> And the original author of the commit, that introduced the issue too.
>
> Suzuki
Hi All,
Thanks for the discussion and feedbacks.
This patch fixes the shellcheck warning introduced in function
"cs_etm_dev_name". But with the changes that Suzuki suggested, we won't need
the function "cs_etm_dev_name" since the code will use
"/sys/bus/event_source/devices/cs_etm/" . In that case, can I drop this patch
for now from this series ?
Thanks
Athira
>
>> Thanks,
>> Namhyung
>>> ---
>>> tools/perf/tests/shell/test_arm_coresight.sh | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/shell/test_arm_coresight.sh
>>> b/tools/perf/tests/shell/test_arm_coresight.sh
>>> index fe78c4626e45..f2115dfa24a5 100755
>>> --- a/tools/perf/tests/shell/test_arm_coresight.sh
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/shell/test_arm_coresight.sh
>>> @@ -12,12 +12,12 @@
>>> glb_err=0
>>>
>>> cs_etm_dev_name() {
>>> - cs_etm_path=$(find /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cs_etm/ -name
>>> cpu* -print -quit)
>>> + cs_etm_path=$(find /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cs_etm/ -name
>>> 'cpu*' -print -quit)
>>> trcdevarch=$(cat ${cs_etm_path}/mgmt/trcdevarch)
>>> archhver=$((($trcdevarch >> 12) & 0xf))
>>> archpart=$(($trcdevarch & 0xfff))
>>>
>>> - if [ $archhver -eq 5 -a "$(printf "0x%X\n" $archpart)" = "0xA13" ]
>>> ; then
>>> + if [ $archhver -eq 5 ] && [ "$(printf "0x%X\n" $archpart)" =
>>> "0xA13" ] ; then
>>> echo "ete"
>>> else
>>> echo "etm"
>>> --
>>> 2.31.1
