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: <1265206784.24455.568.camel@laptop>
Date:	Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:19:44 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	"Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@...el.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jamie Iles <jamie.iles@...ochip.com>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, perfmon2-devel@...ts.sf.net
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] perf_events, x86: PEBS support

On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 15:07 +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >> The only improvement that PEBS provides is that you get an IP and the
> >> machine state at retirement of an instruction that caused the event to
> >> increment. Thus, the IP points to the next dynamic instruction. The instruction
> >> is not the one that cause the P-th occurence of the event, if you set the
> >> period to P. It is at P+N, where N cannot be predicted and varies depending
> >> on the event and executed code. This introduces some bias in the samples..
> >
> > I'm not sure I follow, it records the next event after overflow, doesn't
> > that make it P+1?
> >
> That is not what I wrote. I did not say if records at P+1. I said it records
> at P+N, where N varies from sample to sample and cannot be predicted.
> N is expressed in the unit of the sampling event. 

OK, so I'm confused. 

The manual says it arms the PEBS assist on overflow, and the PEBS thing
will then record the next event. Which to me reads like P+1.

You're saying they're wrong and they record a random event after the
overflow?


--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ