Re: [PATCH] dmatest: masking tests for channel capabilities

[Dan Williams]

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Dan Williams <djbw@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Jubin Mehta <jubin.mehta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>> Would you like to have some changes regarding the configuration
>>> process for the module parameters of the dmatest?
>>
>> Yes, as a first step I would like to see a clean up of the the
>> configuration parameters to be available via
>> /sys/module/dmatest/parameters rather than /sys/kernel/debug/dmatest
>
> Do  you mean to enable write access to them?

Yes.

>
>> As for "run" and "results" I see Andy's point that those are a bit
>> awkward as parameters.  However, we do have trace points as a more
>> general mechanism for dumping events and data to userspace.  If we had
>> /sys/module/dmatest/parameters/run with a tracepoint for the result
>> line does that get us everything we need for automation?  I can see
>> more tracepoints beng added to get some perf metrics out of the tests.
>
> I'm not familiar neither with perf, nor with tracepoints. Could you
> elaborate and show here the scheme how it should work? How we will get
> results? In what form?
>

It would be very similar to what it does now except using generic
functionality.  At a high level you would have a tracepoint that emits
something like:

dma0chan0-copy0: #1: No errors with src_off=0x7bf dst_off=0x8ad len=0x3fea (0)

...and that message shows up in the ftrace buffer when it fires.

These articles are a good starting point.
https://lwn.net/Articles/379903/
https://lwn.net/Articles/383362/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/