linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] perf_events: added new start/stop PMU callbacks

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: <1265646612.11509.13.camel@laptop>
Date:	Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:30:11 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	eranian@...gle.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, paulus@...ba.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, fweisbec@...il.com, robert.richter@....com,
	perfmon2-devel@...ts.sf.net, eranian@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] perf_events: added new start/stop PMU callbacks

On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 17:06 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> 	In certain situations, the kernel may need to stop and start the
> 	same event rapidly. The current PMU callbacks do not distinguish
> 	between stop and release  (i.e., stop + free the resource). Thus,
> 	a counter may be released, then it will be immediately re-acquired.
> 	Event scheduling will again take place with no guarantee to assign
> 	the same counter. On some processors, this may event yield to failure
> 	to assign the event back due to competion between cores.
> 
> 	This patch is adding a new pair of callback to stop and restart a
> 	counter without actually release the underlying counter resource.
> 	On stop, the counter is stopped, its values saved and that's it.
> 	On start, the value is reloaded and counter is restarted (on x86,
> 	actual restart is delayed until perf_enable()).
> 	
> 	Note this patch does not provide support for non-X86 PMU. This needs
> 	to be added.
> 
> 	Signed-off-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
> --

I think we can do this much easier by adding a list_head to
hw_perf_event and make event_list into a proper list, then we can remove
that funny loop on remove and instead move the event to a remove_list
when there's a put_event_constraint() method and iterate that list on
hw_perf_enable().

But before we do that, I think we need to look at the /* hardware */
part of struct hw_perf_event, and make that arch specific, we've been
growing that a lot lately and I don't think !x86 uses any of that.

--
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/