linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] basic perf support for sparc

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]

Message-Id: <20090903.220906.44384937.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:09:06 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	mingo@...e.hu
Cc:	jens.axboe@...cle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] basic perf support for sparc

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 07:02:56 +0200

> 
> * David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> 
>> Does this build for you without adding an
>> arch/sparc/include/asm/perf_counter.h that looks
>> something like the following?
>> 
>> #ifndef _ASM_SPARC_PERF_COUNTER_H
>> #define _ASM_SPARC_PERF_COUNTER_H
>> 
>> #define PERF_COUNTER_INDEX_OFFSET	0
>> 
>> #endif
>> 
>> Or is this somehow now required in the -tip trees?
> 
> This used to be required but i recently fixed this (and that fix is 
> upstream as well) via:
> 
>   f738eb1: perf_counter: Fix the PARISC build
> 
> there's now a default define of 0 so you dont have to define it and 
> can leave out this chunk.
> 
> ( That index is only interesting if the architecture has a way to 
>   allow unprivileged user-space to access counter registers 
>   directly. In that case the index reflects the offset from the 
>   (constantly changing) dynamix index which we put into the mmap 
>   header. With Sparc not having a hw-PMU implementation this index 
>   is entirely uninteresting at this stage. )

But you still do need at least an empty perf_counter.h file
right?  Jens must have left the file out of his submission
by accident, and that's what I'm trying to get to the bottom
of here :-)

I assume there was a similar change to deal with references to
set_perf_counter_pending() too or is at least a NOP definition
still needed?
--
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/