Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] perf vendor events: Update CascadelakeX events to v1.08

[Jin, Yao]

Hi Arnaldo,

On 9/26/2020 2:05 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 09:25:06AM +0800, Jin, Yao escreveu:
> > On 9/23/2020 3:42 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Em Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:19:17AM +0800, Jin Yao escreveu:
> > > > - Update CascadelakeX events to v1.08.
> > > > - Update CascadelakeX JSON metrics from TMAM 4.0.
>
> > > > Other fixes:
> > > > - Add NO_NMI_WATCHDOG metric constraint to Backend_Bound
> > > > - Change 'MB/sec' to 'MB' in UNC_M_PMM_BANDWIDTH.
>
> > > [acme@five perf]$ am /wb/1.patch
> > > Applying: perf vendor events: Update CascadelakeX events to v1.08
> > > error: patch fragment without header at line 283: @@ -213,14 +220,14 @@
> > > Patch failed at 0001 perf vendor events: Update CascadelakeX events to v1.08
> > > hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
> > > When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
> > > If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
> > > To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
> > > [acme@five perf]$ git am --abort
> > > [acme@five perf]$ set -o vi
> > > [acme@five perf]$ patch -p1 < /wb/1.patch
> > > patching file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/cache.json
> > > patching file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/clx-metrics.json
> > > Hunk #7 FAILED at 87.
> > > 1 out of 7 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/clx-metrics.json.rej
> > > patching file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/frontend.json
> > > patching file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/memory.json
> > > patching file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/other.json
> > > patching file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/pipeline.json
> > > patching file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/uncore-memory.json
> > > patching file tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/uncore-other.json
> > > [acme@five perf]$
>
> > > [acme@five perf]$ head tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/clx-metrics.json.rej
> > > --- tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/clx-metrics.json
> > > +++ tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/clx-metrics.json
> > > @@ -87,86 +70,110 @@
> > >            "MetricName": "CLKS"
> > >        },
> > >        {
> > > -        "BriefDescription": "Total issue-pipeline slots (per-Physical Core)",
> > > +        "BriefDescription": "Total issue-pipeline slots (per-Physical Core till ICL; per-Logical Processor ICL onward)",
> > >            "MetricExpr": "4 * cycles",
> > >            "MetricGroup": "TopDownL1",
> > > [acme@five perf]$ wc -l tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/clx-metrics.json.rej
> > > 133 tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/cascadelakex/clx-metrics.json.rej
> > > [acme@five perf]$
>
> > > Can you please check?
>
> > I applied the patch on latest perf/core, it seemed OK.
>
> > # git log --oneline
> > 4cbdb1c21926 (HEAD -> perf/core) perf vendor events: Update CascadelakeX events to v1.08
> > b1f815c479c1 (tag: perf-tools-tests-v5.10-2020-09-10, origin/perf/core) perf vendor events power9:
> > Add hv_24x7 core level metric events
> > f5a489dc8189 perf metricgroup: Pass pmu_event structure as a parameter for
> > arch_get_runtimeparam() 560ccbc4a52c perf jevents: Add support for parsing
> > perchip/percore events ...
>   
> > I strongly suspect that part of patch content is truncated by mail system.
>   
> > Let me resend the patch as attachment. Sorry about that!
>
> Thanks, it now works, but then... You forgot to add the Cc: entries for
> all the people in your actual e-mail Cc: list, and also the
> Reviewed-by: from Andy, I had to do it all manually, so when I applied
> your attachments with 'git am' I needed to go on and manually collect
> all the Cc, Reviewed-by and Acked-by tags.

Sorry for replying so late!

I realized I forgot to add CC/To list in the attached patches. Very sorry about that! :(

> This complicates things, slows me down, doesn't scale. While I do all
> this manual stuff normally, I don't think this can continue, and its not
> something specific to you, submitters have to pay attention to these
> details. Or tools.

Sorry for bringing troubles to you.

> Things like b4 help with this and probably have to take into account
> attachments as well, that is why I'm adding Konstantin to the Cc: list
> of this message.

Let me learn b4... but as Konstantin said in another thread, it's complicated too.

Anyway, for this case, I will take care in future. At least, I will check and add CC/To list to the 
attached patch.

Thanks
Jin Yao

> Konstantin, is this case covered? I.e. patches that get botched and then
> require attachments to be sent to then gets processed?
>
> Thanks, applied.
>
> - Arnaldo