lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 16 Aug 2010 16:09:14 +0800
From:	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
	"Fu, Michael" <michael.fu@...el.com>
Subject: perf, how to support multiple x86 hw pmus?

Hi, all

Here multiple x86 hw pmus means, for example, Intel "core" and "uncore"
pmu. "core" pmu is to collect per cpu data, cpu-cycles, branch-misses,
etc. "uncore" pmu is to collect per package data, L3 cache, Intel QPI,
integrated memory controller, etc.

I am going to add Intel uncore pmu support to perf. To reduce code
duplicate, "uncore" pmu should reuse most of the "core" pmu code. But
currently, the x86 core pmu code(arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c) only
supports one pmu, with a definition as below.

static struct x86_pmu x86_pmu __read_mostly;

Many functions use above global definition "x86_pmu". It seems to me
that we need to re-structure x86 pmu code to support multiple hw pmus.

Any idea?

Thanks,
Lin Ming

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists