linux-kernel - Re: [patch] Performance Counters for Linux, v3

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

Date:	Fri, 12 Dec 2008 05:59:38 -0500
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, eranian@...il.com,
	Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Arjan van de Veen <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [patch] Performance Counters for Linux, v3

On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:21:11AM +0100, Robert Richter wrote:
> I agree with Stephane. There are already many different PMU
> descriptions depending on family, model and steppping and with *every*
> new cpu revision you will get one more update. Implementing this in
> the kernel would require kernel updates where otherwise no changes
> would be necessary.

Please stop the Bullshit.  You have to update _something_.  It makes a
lot of sense to update the thing you need to udpate anyway for new
hardware support, and not some piece of junk library like libperfmon.

> > Talking with my community hat on, that is an artificial problem created
> > by distributions, tell them to fix it.
> 
> It does not make sense to close the eyes to reality. There are systems
> where it is not possible to update the kernel frequently. Probably you
> have one running yourself.

Of course it is.  And on many of my systems it's much easier to update a
kernel than a library.  A kernel I can build myself, for libraries I'm
more or less reliant on the distro or hacking fugly rpm or debian
packagging bits.

Having HW support in the kernel is a lot easier than in weird libraries.
--
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/