linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/18] 2.6.17.9 perfmon2 patch for review: PMU interruption support

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:	Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:40:57 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...nkl.hpl.hp.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, eranian@....hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/18] 2.6.17.9 perfmon2 patch for review: PMU
 interruption support

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:05:58 -0700
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...nkl.hpl.hp.com> wrote:

> ...
>
> +irqreturn_t pfm_interrupt_handler(int irq, void *arg, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> +	u64 start_cycles, total_cycles;
> +
> +	get_cpu();
> +
> +	start_cycles = pfm_arch_get_itc();
> +
> +	__pfm_interrupt_handler(regs);
> +
> +	total_cycles = pfm_arch_get_itc();
> +
> +	__get_cpu_var(pfm_stats).pfm_ovfl_intr_cycles += total_cycles - start_cycles;
> +
> +	put_cpu_no_resched();
> +	return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}

If this code is only ever called from interrupt context then I suspect the
get_cpu() is not needed.  __get_cpu_var() requires that preemption be
disabled (so we cannot wander over to a different CPU midway) but IRQ
code doesn't get preempted.

-
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/