Re: [PATCH 17/53] perf test: Improve bp_signal

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:21:29AM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 06:37:29PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 01:48:08PM +0000, Wang Nan escreveu:
> > > Will Deacon [1] has some question on patch [2]. This patch improves
> > > test__bp_signal so we can test:
> > > 
> > >  1. A watchpoint and a breakpoint that fire on the same instruction
> > >  2. Nested signals
> > > 
> > > Test result:
> > > 
> > >  On x86_64 and ARM64 (result are similar with patch [2] on ARM64):
> > > 
> > >  # ./perf test -v signal
> > >  17: Test breakpoint overflow signal handler                  :
> > >  --- start ---
> > >  test child forked, pid 10213
> > >  count1 1, count2 3, count3 2, overflow 3, overflows_2 3
> > >  test child finished with 0
> > >  ---- end ----
> > >  Test breakpoint overflow signal handler: Ok
> > > 
> > > So at least 2 cases Will doubted are handled correctly.
> > > 
> > > [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/g/20160104165535.GI1616@xxxxxxx
> > > [2] http://lkml.kernel.org/g/1450921362-198371-1-git-send-email-wangnan0@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <wangnan0@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Will, are you ok with this one? Can I have an Acked-by or better,
> > Tested-by for the AARCH64 base?
> > 
> > IIRC Jiri made some comment about this one?
> 
> I thought I acked this one.. all comments were addresses, so:
> 
> Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>

Ok, so, Will, any comments? Nack?

- Arnaldo