| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <bd4cb8901003181429j235ac282pe0440f02b9138015@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:29:04 +0100 From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> 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: [PATCH] perf_events: fix ordering bug in perf_output_sample() On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 14:42 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote: >> In order to parse a sample correctly based on the information >> requested via sample_type, the kernel needs to save each component >> in a known order. There is no type value saved with each component. >> The current convention is that each component is saved according to >> the order in enum perf_event_sample_format. But perf_output_sample() >> was not completely following this convention, thereby making samples >> impossible to parse without internal kernel knowledge. >> >> This patch puts things in the right order. > > NAK, not so actually, its in the order specified in the > PERF_RECORD_SAMPLE comment. > And why is that order different than the one in the enum? -- 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