linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH RFC 01/10] perf,tools: open event on evsel cpus and threads

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 20 Aug 2015 17:24:32 +0000
From:	"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>
To:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
CC:	"acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
	"a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"jolsa@...nel.org" <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	"namhyung@...nel.org" <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	"eranian@...gle.com" <eranian@...gle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH RFC 01/10] perf,tools: open event on evsel cpus and
 threads

> 
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 05:25:37AM -0400, kan.liang@...el.com wrote:
> > From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
> >
> > evsel may have different cpus and threads as evlist's.
> > Use it's own cpus and threads, when open evsel in perf record.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/builtin-record.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> > index 25cf6b4..a0178bf 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> > @@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ static int record__open(struct record *rec)
> >
> >  	evlist__for_each(evlist, pos) {
> >  try_again:
> > -		if (perf_evsel__open(pos, evlist->cpus, evlist->threads) <
> 0) {
> > +		if (perf_evsel__open(pos, pos->cpus, pos->threads) < 0) {
> >  			if (perf_evsel__fallback(pos, errno, msg,
> sizeof(msg))) {
> >  				if (verbose)
> >  					ui__warning("%s\n", msg);
> > --
> > 1.8.3.1
> >
> 
> dont we need then handle filters the same way?
> like in attached change? totally untested..

Filters look only work for tracepoint event, which doesn't have cpu limit.
So evlist and evsel should always be same.
I think we don't need to change it.

> 
> jirka
> 
> 
> ---
> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> index 7aa039bd379a..f5cdf678d504 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> @@ -244,12 +244,9 @@ static void handle_initial_delay(void)
>  	struct perf_evsel *counter;
> 
>  	if (initial_delay) {
> -		const int ncpus = cpu_map__nr(evsel_list->cpus),
> -			nthreads = thread_map__nr(evsel_list->threads);
> -
>  		usleep(initial_delay * 1000);
>  		evlist__for_each(evsel_list, counter)
> -			perf_evsel__enable(counter, ncpus, nthreads);
> +			perf_evsel__enable(counter);
>  	}
>  }
>

Agree, we need to use evsel's cpu and threads here.
What about the code as below? It should be simpler.
+			perf_evsel__enable(counter, cpu_map__nr(counter->cpus), thread_map__nr(counter->threads));
 
 
Thanks,
Kan

--
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/