linux-kernel - [BUG] perf: perf_swevent PMU should not be on rotation

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:	Wed, 5 Sep 2012 16:03:15 +0200
From:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: [BUG] perf: perf_swevent PMU should not be on rotation_list

Hi,

I was looking at the rotation code and I found out that when
I monitor a SW event (in my case a probe), I end up having
two PMUs on the rotation list on Intel Core: cpu and software.

I thought there was no multiplexing needed for SW events.

So why is the SW PMU on the rotation list causing extra
iterations through the rotation code?

Shouldn't we do something like:

--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -771,6 +780,9 @@ static void perf_pmu_rotate_start(struct pmu *pmu)
        struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx = this_cpu_ptr(pmu->pmu_cpu_context);
        struct list_head *head = &__get_cpu_var(rotation_list);

+       if (pmu->type == PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE)
+               return;
+
        WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled());

        if (list_empty(&cpuctx->rotation_list))
--
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/